MATES in Manufacturing: A Cluster RCT Evaluation of a Workplace Suicide Prevention Program.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Anthony D LaMontagne, Christopher Lockwood, Andrew Mackinnon, David Henry, Laura Cox, Neil R Hall, Tania L King
{"title":"MATES in Manufacturing: A Cluster RCT Evaluation of a Workplace Suicide Prevention Program.","authors":"Anthony D LaMontagne, Christopher Lockwood, Andrew Mackinnon, David Henry, Laura Cox, Neil R Hall, Tania L King","doi":"10.1002/ajim.23698","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The MATES in Construction suicide prevention program was adapted to the manufacturing sector and evaluated in a pilot of the program.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ten manufacturing worksites were randomly assigned to intervention (5 sites) and wait-list control (5 sites) conditions in a two-arm cluster randomized design. 1245 workers responded at baseline (87% response rate) and 648 at final (35% response rate). Literacy of Suicide Scale (LOSS) was assessed as a process outcome, and help-seeking intentions as the primary outcome (General Help-Seeking Questionnaire [GHSQ] score). Secondary outcomes included help sought, suicidal thoughts and likelihood of suicide attempt scores, and Kessler-6 scores. Linear mixed models for repeated measures were used in intention-to-treat (ITT) and completer analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All sites finished the trial, with intervention periods ranging from 8 to 11 months; however, none of the five intervention sites fully implemented the intervention as planned. ITT analyses showed an improvement in LOSS scores within the intervention group (0.49, 95% CI 0.13-0.49), but the mean difference in change between intervention and control included the null (0.34, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.80). The primary outcome of GHSQ scores also improved within the intervention group, but the difference in change included the null (mean difference 1.52, 95% CI -0.69 to 3.74). No secondary outcomes improved relative to control in ITT or completers analyses. Exploratory analysis of disaggregated GHSQ help sources showed greater improvement in mean difference in change for the main MATES message of seeking help from MATES Connectors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The intervention, as implemented, was not effective at achieving the primary or secondary outcomes.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN 12622000122752.</p>","PeriodicalId":7873,"journal":{"name":"American journal of industrial medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of industrial medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23698","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The MATES in Construction suicide prevention program was adapted to the manufacturing sector and evaluated in a pilot of the program.

Methods: Ten manufacturing worksites were randomly assigned to intervention (5 sites) and wait-list control (5 sites) conditions in a two-arm cluster randomized design. 1245 workers responded at baseline (87% response rate) and 648 at final (35% response rate). Literacy of Suicide Scale (LOSS) was assessed as a process outcome, and help-seeking intentions as the primary outcome (General Help-Seeking Questionnaire [GHSQ] score). Secondary outcomes included help sought, suicidal thoughts and likelihood of suicide attempt scores, and Kessler-6 scores. Linear mixed models for repeated measures were used in intention-to-treat (ITT) and completer analyses.

Results: All sites finished the trial, with intervention periods ranging from 8 to 11 months; however, none of the five intervention sites fully implemented the intervention as planned. ITT analyses showed an improvement in LOSS scores within the intervention group (0.49, 95% CI 0.13-0.49), but the mean difference in change between intervention and control included the null (0.34, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.80). The primary outcome of GHSQ scores also improved within the intervention group, but the difference in change included the null (mean difference 1.52, 95% CI -0.69 to 3.74). No secondary outcomes improved relative to control in ITT or completers analyses. Exploratory analysis of disaggregated GHSQ help sources showed greater improvement in mean difference in change for the main MATES message of seeking help from MATES Connectors.

Conclusion: The intervention, as implemented, was not effective at achieving the primary or secondary outcomes.

Trial registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN 12622000122752.

制造业中的配偶:工作场所自杀预防计划的聚类随机对照试验评估。
背景:建筑自杀预防计划的MATES适用于制造业,并在该计划的试点中进行评估。方法:采用双组随机设计,将10个生产车间随机分为干预组(5个)和等候组(5个)。1245名工人在基线(87%的回复率),648名工人在最终(35%的回复率)。自杀量表读写能力(LOSS)作为过程结果进行评估,寻求帮助意愿作为主要结果(一般寻求帮助问卷[GHSQ]评分)。次要结果包括寻求帮助,自杀想法和自杀企图的可能性得分,以及Kessler-6得分。在意向治疗(ITT)和完整分析中使用了重复测量的线性混合模型。结果:所有试验点均完成试验,干预期8 ~ 11个月;然而,五个干预点中没有一个完全按照计划实施干预。ITT分析显示干预组的LOSS评分有所改善(0.49,95% CI 0.13-0.49),但干预组和对照组之间的平均变化差异包括null (0.34, 95% CI -0.10至0.80)。干预组中GHSQ评分的主要结局也有所改善,但变化的差异包括零值(平均差异1.52,95% CI -0.69至3.74)。在ITT或完成者分析中,相对于对照组,次要结局没有改善。对分解的GHSQ帮助来源的探索性分析显示,从MATES连接器寻求帮助的主要MATES信息的平均变化差异有更大的改善。结论:该干预措施在实现主要或次要结局方面并不有效。试验注册:澳大利亚和新西兰临床试验注册:ACTRN 12622000122752。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American journal of industrial medicine
American journal of industrial medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
5.70%
发文量
108
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: American Journal of Industrial Medicine considers for publication reports of original research, review articles, instructive case reports, and analyses of policy in the fields of occupational and environmental health and safety. The Journal also accepts commentaries, book reviews and letters of comment and criticism. The goals of the journal are to advance and disseminate knowledge, promote research and foster the prevention of disease and injury. Specific topics of interest include: occupational disease; environmental disease; pesticides; cancer; occupational epidemiology; environmental epidemiology; disease surveillance systems; ergonomics; dust diseases; lead poisoning; neurotoxicology; endocrine disruptors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信