Occupational stress management programs

However, there was significant heterogeneity and limitations with the statistical analysis, and further research was needed. This review answered a clearly defined review question using a broad range of outcome measures. A number of different resources were searched for published and unpublished studies. Only studies written in English were eligible for inclusion, which suggested a risk of language bias.

The reviewers' own assessments appeared to suggest a risk of missing studies. There was some risk of reviewer error and bias as study data were not always verified by a second reviewer and the authors did not report how many reviewers assessed studies for inclusion in the review.

It appeared that no validity assessment was carried out and so the reliability of the data was unclear. There were many differences between the included studies, particularly with respect to interventions, populations and outcomes. Statistical tests suggested that there was significant heterogeneity associated with many of the analyses and some additional analyses were carried out to try and investigate the potential effects of the heterogeneity.

The authors acknowledged that the review had a number of limitations that could affect the reliability of the review. The findings were based on a small number of studies with a short duration of follow-up. Practice : The authors stated that cognitive-behavioural programmes should not generally be combined with other treatment, but relaxation and mediation can be used as part of a larger set of treatment components.

Research : The authors stated that further well-designed randomised controlled trials of stress management programmes in occupational setting were required. Future studies should report all outcomes assessed and not just those that were statistically significant.

Studies should assess whether stress levels returned when interventions ceased. Effects of occupational stress management intervention programs: a meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology ; 13 1 : The benefits of interventions for work-related stress. American Journal of Public Health , 91; This is a critical abstract of a systematic review that meets the criteria for inclusion on DARE.

Each critical abstract contains a brief summary of the review methods, results and conclusions followed by a detailed critical assessment on the reliability of the review and the conclusions drawn.

Turn recording back on. National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Search term. Review published: CRD summary This review concluded that stress management programmes were associated with favourable medium to large effect sizes and cognitive-behavioural stress management programmes consistently produced the largest effects mainly on psychological outcomes in occupational settings.

Authors' objectives To determine the effectiveness of stress management intervention programmes in occupational settings. Study selection Randomised controlled trials RCTs of primary or secondary stress management interventions versus waiting list or no treatment control in working populations not already diagnosed with a major psychiatric disorder or stress-related somatic disorder were eligible for inclusion in the review.

The authors did not state how papers were selected for the review. Assessment of study quality The authors did not state that they assessed validity. Google Scholar. Cite Cite H. Select Format Select format. Permissions Icon Permissions. Abstract There are many occupational stress management programmes available which are designed to prevent and cure the negative aspects of job-stress.

Effectiveness , evaluation , occupational stress , stress management programmes. Issue Section:. Download all slides. View Metrics. Email alerts Article activity alert. Advance article alerts. New issue alert. Subject alert. Receive exclusive offers and updates from Oxford Academic. More on this topic Job strain and retirement decisions in UK general practice. The overall weighted effect size Cohen's d for all studies was 0. Interventions were coded as cognitive-behavioral, relaxation, organizational, multimodal, or alternative.

Analyses based on these subgroups suggested that intervention type played a moderating role. Cognitive-behavioral programs consistently produced larger effects than other types of interventions, but if additional treatment components were added the effect was reduced.