Resilience, work engagement and stress reactivity in a middle-aged manual worker population

Abstract

Work stress is a growing problem in Europe. Together, the negative physiological effect of stress on health, and increasing age increases the risk of developing cardiovascular disease in those aged over 50years. Therefore, identifying older workers who may be at risk of work-related stress, and its physiological effects, is key to promoting their health and wellbeing in the workforce. The present study examined the relationship between perceived psychological resilience and work-related factors (work engagement and presenteeism) and the physiological response to acute psychological stress in older manual workers in the UK. Thirty-one participants, mean (SD) age 54.9 (3.78)years reported perceived levels of resilience, work engagement, and presenteeism using standardized questionnaires. Cardiovascular measurements (heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) and salivary cortisol were used to assess their physiological response to an acute psychological stress task. Resilience was not associated with work-related factors or reactivity. However, workers with higher work engagement showed lower SBP (p=0.02) and HR (p=0.001) reactivity than those with lower work engagement. Further, those with higher sickness presenteeism also had higher HR reactivity (p=0.03). This suggests a potential pathway by which higher work stress might contribute to the risk of future cardiovascular disease.

“I can fight it!”: A qualitative study of resilience in people with inflammatory bowel disease

“…Many participants in our study recognized that understanding and support from employers and colleagues gave them strength to rebound from the disease, which was consistent with the results from the study of Teresa Lynch [29]. Meanwhile, another study [30] indicated that resilience and work has no relationship. On one hand, the government needs to consider launching a special employment policy for patients with IBD.…”

Blunted cardiovascular responses to acute psychological stress predict low behavioral but not self‐reported perseverance

“…Participants were 64 mixed‐sex University of Birmingham students. A minimum sample size of 42 for this study was determined from a previous cardiovascular stress reactivity study, which found significant correlations between behavioral/psychosocial factors and reactivity in a sample of 31 participants (Black, Balanos, & Whittaker, ). Using G ‐power and the R 2 of .248 to calculate the f 2 effect size from this previous study equals f 2 = 0.33, and when α = .05 and power is set at .95, this equals a recommended sample size of 42.…”

Biological and Psychological Perspectives of Resilience: Is It Possible to Improve Stress Resistance?

“…For example, social support and resilience have multiple mediation effects on the regulation of cognitive emotion and acute stress in Chinese male soldiers (Cai et al, 2017 ). However, there are also studies that claim there are no relationships between resilience and social support, lifestyle factors or work-related factors (Corina and Adriana, 2013 ; Black et al, 2017 ), although it is generally acknowledged that resilience buffers against various types of stress. These inconsistent behavioral results might be attributed to the use of different resilience questionnaires, the sample size and type of human subjects, and non-standardization of the test procedure, suggesting that it is critical to identify the physiological substrates underlying the manipulation of resilience.…”