Dataset Information

Is higher resilience predictive of lower stress and better mental health among corporate executives?

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess the impact of resilience, the ability to withstand and bounce back from adversity, on measures of well-being, self-reported stress, and mental health diagnoses.

Methods

This study was a cross-sectional survey of participants seen at an executive health practice at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, from January 2012 through September 2016. Participants completed an anonymous survey that included demographic information and 3 validated survey instruments-the 10-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC), the 12-item Linear Analogue Self-Assessment Scale (LASA), and the 14-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). Self-reported history of mental health diagnoses was also collected. CD-RISC scores were used to stratify participants into lower (<30), medium (30-34), or higher (?35) resilience categories. Participants' LASA scores, PSS scores, and self-reported mental health diagnoses were compared among resilience categories.

Results

Of the 2,027 eligible participants, 1,954 met the study inclusion criteria as currently employed corporate-sponsored executive or business professionals (self-designated) who completed the CD-RISC survey. Most participants (62.5%) were aged 40 to 59 years. The majority were male (78.3%), white (95.3%), educated (86.2%), and in a committed relationship (89.7%). Among participants, 41.7% reported higher resilience, 34.3% had medium resilience, and 24.0% had lower resilience. The quality of life and overall LASA scores were positively associated with higher resilience (P < .001). PSS scores and self-reported mental health diagnoses were negatively associated with higher resilience (P < .001). These associations remained significant after adjusting for patient characteristics.

Conclusions

In this cross-sectional survey of a large cohort of corporative executives, the lower-resilience cohort had a 4-fold higher prevalence of depression and an almost 3-fold higher prevalence of anxiety compared with the higher-resilience cohort. High resilience was positively associated with well-being and negatively associated with perceived stress. Our findings suggest that higher resilience in the executive workplace environment is associated with better mental health, reduced stress, and greater well-being.

SUBMITTER: Kermott CA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6559706 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Is higher resilience predictive of lower stress and better mental health among corporate executives?

Kermott Cindy A CA Johnson Ruth E RE Sood Richa R Jenkins Sarah M SM Sood Amit A

PloS one 20190611 6

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess the impact of resilience, the ability to withstand and bounce back from adversity, on measures of well-being, self-reported stress, and mental health diagnoses.<h4>Methods</h4>This study was a cross-sectional survey of participants seen at an executive health practice at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, from January 2012 through September 2016. Participants completed an anonymous survey that included demographic information and 3 validated survey instruments-the 10- ...[more]

PMID: 31185049

Similar Datasets

Project description:The role of resilience in mediating the negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of US women is poorly understood. We examined socioeconomic factors associated with low resilience in women, the relationship of low resilience with psychiatric morbidity, and the mediating role of resilience in the relationship between pandemic-related stress and other coincident psychiatric morbidities. Using a quota-based sample from a national panel, we conducted a web-based survey of 3200 US women in April 2020. Weighted, multivariate logistic regression was used to model the odds of pandemic-related stress, and coincident depression and anxiety symptoms among those with and without low resilience. Structural equation modeling was used to evaluate resilience as a mediator of the relationship between pandemic-related stress and other coincident psychiatric morbidities. Risk factors for low resilience included younger age, lower household income, lower education, unemployment, East/Southeast Asian race, unmarried/unpartnered status, and higher number of medical comorbidities. Low resilience was significantly associated with greater odds of depression symptoms (OR = 3.78, 95% CI [3.10–4.60]), anxiety symptoms (OR = 4.17, 95% CI [3.40–5.11]), and pandemic-related stress (OR = 2.86, 95% CI [2.26–3.26]). Resilience acted as a partial mediator in the association between pandemic-related stress and anxiety symptoms (proportion mediated = 0.23) and depression symptoms (proportion mediated = 0.28). In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, low resilience mediated the association between pandemic-related stress and psychiatric morbidity. Strategies proven to enhance resilience, such as cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness-based stress reduction, and addressing socioeconomic factors, may help mitigate mental health outcomes. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00737-021-01184-7.

Project description:Disasters are a recurring fact of life, and major incidents can have both immediate and long-lasting negative effects on the health and well-being of people, communities, and economies. A primary goal of many disaster preparedness, response, and recovery plans is to reduce the likelihood and severity of disaster impacts through increased resilience of individuals and communities. Unfortunately, most plans do not address directly major drivers of long-term disaster impacts on humans-that is, acute, chronic, and cumulative stress-and therefore do less to enhance resilience than they could. Stress has been shown to lead to or exacerbate ailments ranging from mental illness, domestic violence, substance abuse, post-traumatic stress disorders, and suicide to cardiovascular disease, respiratory problems, and other infirmities. Individuals, groups, communities, organizations, and social ties are all vulnerable to stress. Based on a targeted review of what we considered to be key literature about disasters, resilience, and disaster-associated stress effects, we recommend eight actions to improve resiliency through inclusion of stress alleviation in disaster planning: (1) Improve existing disaster behavioral and physical health programs to better address, leverage, and coordinate resources for stress reduction, relief, and treatment in disaster planning and response. (2) Emphasize pre- and post-disaster collection of relevant biomarker and other health-related data to provide a baseline of health status against which disaster impacts could be assessed, and continued monitoring of these indicators to evaluate recovery. (3) Enhance capacity of science and public health early-responders. (4) Use natural infrastructure to minimize disaster damage. (5) Expand the geography of disaster response and relief to better incorporate the displacement of affected people. (6) Utilize nature-based treatment to alleviate pre- and post-disaster stress effects on health. (7) Review disaster laws, policies, and regulations to identify opportunities to strengthen public health preparedness and responses including for stress-related impacts, better engage affected communities, and enhance provision of health services. (8) With community participation, develop and institute equitable processes pre-disaster for dealing with damage assessments, litigation, payments, and housing.

Dataset Information

Is higher resilience predictive of lower stress and better mental health among corporate executives?

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Is higher resilience predictive of lower stress and better mental health among corporate executives?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure