This paper presents how work participation for employees with common mental health problems can be promoted through mechanisms and contextual factors in the workplace. Practical implications for employers concern multilevel interventions for teams and individuals, including short-term adjustments and social and practical support at work. We suggest professionals to assess and intervene on the presented set of capabilities rather than employee's mental health condition.
We compare sickness absence policies in the Netherlands, Denmark and Ireland, examining whether and how the institutional logic of 'activation' that is paramount in Europe is understood and given shape in each country. They differ in their support for the underlying ideas of 'activation', and especially vary in the design of their governance systems, as can be seen in the allocation of responsibilities, the description of return-to-work routines and the use of regulative instruments. We contribute to institutional theory by demonstrating the important but often neglected role of national governance systems in the macro-micro linkage between institutional logics and organizational and individual behaviour. Since sickness absence is a major cause of workforce inactivity, the practical relevance of this study is the comparative reflection on recent policy developments to improve sickness absence management.
Background
For working patients with a lower socioeconomic position, health complaints often result from a combination of problems on multiple life domains. To prevent long-term health complaints and absence from work, it is crucial for general and occupational health professionals to adopt a broad perspective on health and to collaborate when necessary. This study aimed to evaluate how the ‘Grip on Health’ intervention is implemented in general and occupational health practice to address multi-domain problems and to promote interprofessional collaboration.
Method
A process evaluation was performed among 28 general and occupational health professionals, who were trained and implemented the Grip on Health intervention during a six-month period. The ‘Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations’ was used to evaluate facilitators and barriers for implementing Grip on Health. Data included three group interviews with 17 professionals, a questionnaire and five individual interviews.
Results
While most health professionals were enthusiastic about the Grip on Health intervention, its implementation was hindered by contextual factors. Barriers in the socio-political context consisted of legal rules and regulations around sickness and disability, professional protocols for interprofessional collaboration, and the Covid-19 pandemic. On the organizational level, lack of consultation time was the main barrier. Facilitators were found on the level of the intervention and the health professional. For instance, professionals described how the intervention supports addressing multi-domain problems and has created awareness of work in each other’s healthcare domain. They recognized the relevance of the intervention for a broad target group and experienced benefits of its use. The intervention period was, nevertheless, too short to determine the outcomes of Grip on Health.
Conclusion
The Grip on Health intervention can be used to address problems on multiple life domains and to stimulate interprofessional collaboration. Visualizing multi-domain problems appeared especially helpful to guide patients with a lower socioeconomic position, and a joint training of general and occupational health professionals promoted their mutual awareness and familiarity. For a wider implementation, stakeholders on all levels, including the government and professional associations, should reflect on ways to address contextual barriers to promote a broad perspective on health as well as on collaborative work.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.