Dataset Information

Assessing Objective and Verifiable Indicators Associated With Work-Related Stress: Validation of a Structured Checklist for the Assessment and Management of Work-Related Stress.

ABSTRACT: Risk assessment represents an essential part of any successful intervention in health and safety at work. The most prominent European methodologies propose multi-method approaches for identifying the risks associated with work-related stress. Nevertheless, the most widely used method is the self-administered questionnaire. By adapting the UK Management Standards approach, the Italian National Workers Compensation Authority (INAIL) developed a checklist for the assessment of objective and verifiable indicators of work-related stress. This checklist is filled in by a steering group composed of homogenous groups of workers. Through a web-platform developed by INAIL, a considerable amount of data over the last 5 years has been collected throughout Italy. The aims of this study are to examine the psychometric properties as well as the practical validity of the checklist in a wide sample of Italian companies. The sample comprised 5,301 homogeneous groups of workers nested within 1,631 organizations. The checklist measures two main areas: (1) the organizational indicators of work-related stress (sentinel events) and (2) four and six factors related respectively to content and context of work. Multilevel and multivariate analyses revealed that the checklist shows adequate factor structure and criterion validity. Results also demonstrate that small companies and the public and healthcare sector show higher risk levels. These results support the use of the checklist as a structured and generalizable tool for assessing and monitoring the risks associated with work-related stress.

SUBMITTER: Barbaranelli C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6288307 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessing Objective and Verifiable Indicators Associated With Work-Related Stress: Validation of a Structured Checklist for the Assessment and Management of Work-Related Stress.

Barbaranelli Claudio C Ghezzi Valerio V Di Tecco Cristina C Ronchetti Matteo M Fida Roberta R Ghelli Monica M Persechino Benedetta B Iavicoli Sergio S

Frontiers in psychology 20181204

Risk assessment represents an essential part of any successful intervention in health and safety at work. The most prominent European methodologies propose multi-method approaches for identifying the risks associated with work-related stress. Nevertheless, the most widely used method is the self-administered questionnaire. By adapting the UK Management Standards approach, the Italian National Workers Compensation Authority (INAIL) developed a checklist for the assessment of objective and verifia ...[more]

PMID: 30564175

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveAssessment of the quality of the final product (QFP) is critical in simulation training, such as the clock face suture (CFS) exercise that is used to assess trainees' needle handling and suturing accuracy. Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill (OSATS) scores are the gold standard for the evaluation of trainees. The aim was to investigate variability in the use of OSATS checklists and to evaluate a semi-automatic method of suture analysis vs. OSATS scores.MethodsDetails of 287 CFSs performed by trainees during Fundamentals in Vascular Surgery examinations were collected. All were rated according to a seven item OSATS checklist, including QFP score and an overall score by one or two expert surgeons immediately after completion. Interassessor variability was assessed for the CFS that were assessed by two assessors.In order to assess intra- and interassessor variability, 50 CFS pictures were chosen randomly and submitted to three expert surgeons to rate the QFP twice and to carry out a semi-automatic image analysis of each CFS and the estimated cumulative error (CE; mm) recorded. It was hypothesised that the CE correlates to OSATS checklist items or overall score. Variables were compared for correlation with OSATS results using a linear regression. A Pearson's test was used to confirm the proposed hypothesis.ResultsMean ± standard deviation overall score for the OSATS checklist was 20.61 ± 6.33. Inter- and intra-assessor correlation were statistically significant regarding OSATS checklist items. Both correlations presented a low coefficient of determination, indicating variability. The mean CE was 16.07 ± 4.84 mm, and the correlation between the QFP and CE was statistically significant, proving that CE is an objective metric by which to assess the QFP.ConclusionOSATS score demonstrated intra- and interassessor variability, although there was a significant correlation between scores. CE is an objective metric that is not subject to assessor subjectivity or interassessor variability and is correlated with the gold standard of evaluation.

Project description:BackgroundStress management interventions combining technology with human involvement have the potential to improve the cost-effectiveness of solely human-delivered interventions, but few randomized controlled trials exist for assessing the cost-effectiveness of technology-assisted human interventions.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate whether a technology-assisted telephone intervention for stress management is feasible for increasing mental well-being or decreasing the time use of coaches (as an approximation of intervention cost) while maintaining participants' adherence and satisfaction compared with traditional telephone coaching.MethodsA 2-arm, pilot randomized controlled trial of 9 months for stress management (4-month intensive and 5-month maintenance phases) was conducted. Participants were recruited on the web through a regional occupational health care provider and randomized equally to a research (technology-assisted telephone intervention) and a control (traditional telephone intervention) group. The coaching methodology was based on habit formation, motivational interviewing, and the transtheoretical model. For the research group, technology supported both coaches and participants in identifying behavior change targets, setting the initial coaching plan, monitoring progress, and communication. The pilot outcome was intervention feasibility, measured primarily by self-assessed mental well-being (WorkOptimum index) and self-reported time use of coaches and secondarily by participants' adherence and satisfaction.ResultsA total of 49 eligible participants were randomized to the research (n=24) and control (n=25) groups. Most participants were middle-aged (mean 46.26, SD 9.74 years) and female (47/49, 96%). Mental well-being improved significantly in both groups (WorkOptimum from "at risk" to "good" Â>0.85; P<.001), and no between-group differences were observed in the end (Â=0.56, 95% CI 0.37-0.74; P=.56). The total time use of coaches did not differ significantly between the groups (366.0 vs 343.0 minutes, Â=0.60, 95% CI 0.33-0.85; P=.48). Regarding adherence, the dropout rate was 13% (3/24) and 24% (6/25), and the mean adherence rate to coaching calls was 92% and 86% for the research and control groups, respectively; the frequency of performing coaching tasks was similar for both groups after both phases; and the diligence in performing the tasks during the intensive phase was better for the research group (5.0 vs 4.0, Â=0.58, 95% CI 0.51-0.65; P=.03), but no difference was observed during the maintenance phase. Satisfaction was higher in the research group during the intensive phase (5.0 vs 4.0, Â=0.66, 95% CI 0.58-0.73; P<.001) but not during the maintenance phase.ConclusionsThe technology-assisted telephone intervention is feasible with some modifications, as it had similar preliminary effectiveness as the traditional telephone intervention, and the participants had better satisfaction with and similar or better adherence to the intervention, but it did not reduce the time use of coaches. The technology should be improved to provide more digested information for action planning and templates for messaging.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02445950; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT02445950.

Project description:BackgroundTeaching and assessment of communication skills have become essential in medical education. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) has been found as an appropriate means to assess communication skills within medical education. Studies have demonstrated the importance of a valid assessment of medical students' communication skills. Yet, the validity of the performance scores depends fundamentally on the quality of the rating scales used in an OSCE. Thus, this systematic review aimed at providing an overview of existing rating scales, describing their underlying definition of communication skills, determining the methodological quality of psychometric studies and the quality of psychometric properties of the identified rating scales.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review to identify psychometrically tested rating scales, which have been applied in OSCE settings to assess communication skills of medical students. Our search strategy comprised three databases (EMBASE, PsycINFO, and PubMed), reference tracking and consultation of experts. We included studies that reported psychometric properties of communication skills assessment rating scales used in OSCEs by examiners only. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the COnsensus based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. The quality of psychometric properties was evaluated using the quality criteria of Terwee and colleagues.ResultsData of twelve studies reporting on eight rating scales on communication skills assessment in OSCEs were included. Five of eight rating scales were explicitly developed based on a specific definition of communication skills. The methodological quality of studies was mainly poor. The psychometric quality of the eight rating scales was mainly intermediate.DiscussionOur results reveal that future psychometric evaluation studies focusing on improving the methodological quality are needed in order to yield psychometrically sound results of the OSCEs assessing communication skills. This is especially important given that most OSCE rating scales are used for summative assessment, and thus have an impact on medical students' academic success.

Project description:BackgroundStress is one of the most common reasons for sick leave. Web-based interventions have the potential to reach an unlimited number of users at a low cost and have been shown to be effective in addressing several health-related problems. Handling stress on an individual level is related to behavior change. To support behavioral changes in stress management, My Stress Control (MSC) was developed. The development of MSC was based on several health psychology theories and models; however, central in the development were Social Cognitive Theory, Theory of Reasoned Action, Theory of Planned Behavior, Transactional Theory of Stress and Coping, and the Transtheoretical Model and Stages of Change. MSC is a fully automated program. The program is tailored to the user's specific needs for stress management and behavior change.ObjectiveIn this study, we aim to conduct a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the extent to which MSC affects perceived stress in persons experiencing work-related stress.MethodsThis was a randomized controlled trial with 2 arms. Study participants were recruited by visiting the worksites and workplace meetings. Participants were assigned to the intervention or wait-list group. Web-based questionnaires were used before and after the intervention to collect data. Perceived stress measured using the Perceived Stress Scale-14 was the primary outcome measurement. Analyses were conducted for both between-group and within-group changes.ResultsA total of 92 participants were included in this study: 48 (52%) in the intervention group and 44 (48%) in the wait-list group. Overall, 25% (12/48) of participants in the intervention group and 43% (19/44) of participants in the wait-list group completed the postintervention assessment. There were no significant effects on perceived stress between the intervention and wait-list groups or within the groups. A small effect size (Cohen d=0.25) was found when comparing mean change over time on the primary outcome measure between the intervention and wait-list groups. In addition, a small effect size was found between pre- and postintervention assessments within the intervention group (Cohen d=0.38) as well as within the wait-list group (Cohen d=0.25).ConclusionsThe effect of MSC on perceived stress remains uncertain. As adherence was low in the intervention group, elements or features that facilitate adherence and engagement must be further developed before firmer conclusions regarding the effect of MSC can be made.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03077568; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03077568.

Dataset Information

Assessing Objective and Verifiable Indicators Associated With Work-Related Stress: Validation of a Structured Checklist for the Assessment and Management of Work-Related Stress.

Publications

Assessing Objective and Verifiable Indicators Associated With Work-Related Stress: Validation of a Structured Checklist for the Assessment and Management of Work-Related Stress.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets