Reduced organizational work stress interventions evaluated

Hesselink, D.J. Klein; Wiezer, N.M.; Kleijn, B.A.M. de; Besten, L.A.A. den

doi:10.1037/e573012012-064

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…have increased treatment-related cardiovascular mortality. 22 Although the occurrence of AML 23-26 and CML 27 after RAI treatment of WDTC has been previously reported, to our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive report of risk dynamics of individual SHM entities over time after RAI treatment of WDTC. Furthermore, our analyses did not show increased hazards for the development of other SHMs among WDTC survivors previously treated with RAI.…”

Section: Jcoorgmentioning

confidence: 78%

Risk of Hematologic Malignancies After Radioiodine Treatment of Well-Differentiated Thyroid Cancer

Molenaar

Sidana

Radivoyevitch³

et al. 2018

JCO

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To investigate the risk and outcomes of second hematologic malignancies (SHMs) in a population-based cohort of patients with well-differentiated thyroid cancer (WDTC) treated or not with radioactive iodine (RAI). Methods Patients with WDTC were identified from SEER registries. Competing risk regression analysis was performed to calculate the risks of SHMs that occurred after WDTC treatment and outcomes after SHM development were assessed. Results Of 148,215 patients with WDTC, 53% received surgery alone and 47% received RAI. In total, 783 patients developed an SHM after a median interval of 6.5 years (interquartile range, 3.3 to 11.2 years) from WDTC diagnosis. In multivariable analysis, compared with those undergoing thyroidectomy alone, RAI treatment was associated with an increased early risk of developing acute myeloid leukemia (AML; hazard ratio, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.82; P = .01) and chronic myeloid leukemia (CML; hazard ratio, 3.44; 95% CI, 1.87 to 6.36; P < .001). This increased risk of AML and CML after RAI treatment was seen even in low-risk and intermediate-risk WDTC tumors. Occurrence of AML but not CML in patients with WDTC was associated with shorter median overall survival compared with matched controls (8.0 years v 31.0 years; P = .001). In addition, AML developing after RAI trended toward inferior survival compared with matched controls with de novo AML (median overall survival, 1.2 years v 2.9 years; P = .06). Conclusion Patients with WDTC treated with RAI had an increased early risk of developing AML and CML but no other hematologic malignancies. AML that arises after RAI treatment has a poor prognosis. RAI use in patients with WDTC should be limited to patients with high-risk disease features, and patients with WDTC treated with adjuvant RAI should be monitored for myeloid malignancies as part of cancer surveillance.

show abstract

Section: Jcoorgmentioning

confidence: 78%

Risk of Hematologic Malignancies After Radioiodine Treatment of Well-Differentiated Thyroid Cancer

Molenaar

Sidana

Radivoyevitch³

et al. 2018

JCO

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It also requires an accurate diagnosis of the symptoms, problems, and their root causes; assessment of stakeholders’ attitudes and readiness for change; addressing any differences in perceptions and motives that can act as barriers to implementation; and monitoring the target groups’ uptake and awareness of the intervention. Although off-the-shelf measures and solutions can be useful and economical in some situations, in most cases they do not necessarily help to understand how and why the solution has worked or not, and therefore, tailored fit-for-purpose approaches are often appropriate (e.g., Biron et al, 2012b; Hesselink, Wieser, Den Besten, & De Kleijn, 2012; Randall & Nielsen, 2012).…”

Section: Bridging the Gaps Between Research And Practice In Intervent...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Process evaluation for organizational stress and well-being interventions: Implications for theory, method, and practice.

Biron

Karanika‐Murray

2014

International Journal of Stress Management

130

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the body of evidence showing the effects of psychosocial risks on employees' health is substantial, effective and sustainable stress prevention remains a thorny and complex issue. Most studies have focused on evaluating the effects of organizational interventions, and the results are mixed. Researchers find the evaluation of such actions methodologically challenging whereas practitioners often find the development and implementation of such actions a complicated matter. One of the reasons for this mixed impact is the lack of attention to contextual and process issues, namely how, when, and why interventions have their effects on outcomes such as mental health, well-being, and organizational performance. This paper aims to help researchers and practitioners to improve the development, implementation, and evaluation of organizational initiatives designed to reduce exposure to stress, to promote well-being, and healthy organizations. We review recent developments in the literature on process evaluation and propose examples of broader theoretical frameworks that could be used to improve this area. We articulate the essential elements for developing and bridging gaps between theory, methods, and practice.Throughout, we provide recommendations for the content, process and reporting of research on IPE.Keywords: intervention process evaluation, context, organizational interventions, well-being, occupational stress INTERVENTION PROCESS EVALUATION 3Process evaluation for organizational stress and well-being interventions: Implications for theory, method, and practice Because of their focus on reducing or eliminating the stressful and harmful aspects in the workplace, organizational-level interventions have been thought to be more effective compared to individual-level initiatives which attempt to modify individuals' ability to cope with stress (Semmer, 2011). Several reviews (Briner & Reynolds, 1999;Graveling, Crawford, Cowie, Amati, & Vohra, 2008;Parkes & Sparkes, 1998;Richardson & Rothstein, 2008; Van der Klink, Blonk, Schene, & Van Dijk, 2001) have concluded that there is not sufficient empirical evidence to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of organizational-level interventions, and that the research designs that have been used are too varied or not considered sufficiently strong. This is worrying given the pervasiveness and costs of workrelated stress and the considerable resources that organizations invested to manage it. In 2010 an observation was made that "at present little real progress is being made in [stress] intervention research [and] we do not need 'more of the same'" (Cox et al., 2010, p. 217). The implementation of interventions at the organizational level is considerably more complex and requiring more extensive resources than interventions at the individual level. Nevertheless, and despite calls for the importance of understanding intervention implementation coming from a range of areas such as organizational studies (e.g. Langley, 2009;Pettigrew, Woodman, & Cameron, 2001) and ...

show abstract

Reduced organizational work stress interventions evaluated

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Risk of Hematologic Malignancies After Radioiodine Treatment of Well-Differentiated Thyroid Cancer

Risk of Hematologic Malignancies After Radioiodine Treatment of Well-Differentiated Thyroid Cancer

Process evaluation for organizational stress and well-being interventions: Implications for theory, method, and practice.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About