BackgroundMental health problems are prevalent and costly in working populations. Workplace interventions to address common mental health problems have evolved relatively independently along three main threads or disciplinary traditions: medicine, public health, and psychology. In this Debate piece, we argue that these three threads need to be integrated to optimise the prevention of mental health problems in working populations.DiscussionTo realise the greatest population mental health benefits, workplace mental health intervention needs to comprehensively 1) protect mental health by reducing work–related risk factors for mental health problems; 2) promote mental health by developing the positive aspects of work as well as worker strengths and positive capacities; and 3) address mental health problems among working people regardless of cause. We outline the evidence supporting such an integrated intervention approach and consider the research agenda and policy developments needed to move towards this goal, and propose the notion of integrated workplace mental health literacy.SummaryAn integrated approach to workplace mental health combines the strengths of medicine, public health, and psychology, and has the potential to optimise both the prevention and management of mental health problems in the workplace.

There are an increasing number of studies that have monitored the impact of Stress Management Interventions (SMls) and the results of these studies can play a vital role in informing the development of more effective, evidenced‐based SMIs. In this paper, the authors have undertaken a review of United Kingdom (UK)‐based research that has tested the impact of SMIs. Sixteen studies were examined and the results revealed that the vast majority of interventions were targeted at the individual employee, although there was a tendency for more recent research to focus on organisational level interventions. While all intervention levels were found to have some human and/or organisational benefits, strategies aimed at the individual level were less likely to result in longer‐term benefits. An examination of the research methods used in the 16 studies indicated that UK‐based researchers are beginning to adopt more rigorous research methods. However, there was a tendency for researchers to evaluate interventions over a relatively short time‐frame. The implications of these findings for future research are discussed.

The enormous human and economic costs associated with occupational stress suggest that initiatives designed to prevent and/or reduce employee stress should be high on the agenda of workplace health promotion (WHP) programmes. Although employee stress is often the target of WHP, reviews of job stress interventions suggest that the common approach to combating job stress is to focus on the individual without due consideration of the direct impacts of working conditions on health as well as the effects of working conditions on employees' ability to adopt and sustain 'healthy' behaviours. The purpose of the first part of this paper is to highlight the criticisms of the individual approach to job stress and to examine the evidence for developing strategies that combine both individual and organizational-directed interventions (referred to as the comprehensive approach). There is a risk that WHP practitioners may lose sight of the role that they can play in developing and implementing the comprehensive approach, particularly in countries where occupational health and safety authorities are placing much more emphasis on identifying and addressing organizational sources of job stress. The aim of the second part of this paper is therefore to provide a detailed description of what the comprehensive approach to stress prevention/reduction looks like in practice and to examine the means by which WHP can help develop initiatives that address both the sources and the symptoms of job stress.

No abstract

No abstract