Standardized assessment of psychosocial factors and their influence on medically confirmed health outcomes in workers: a systematic review.

Susel Rosário, João A Fonseca, Albert Nienhaus, José Torres da Costa
{"title":"Standardized assessment of psychosocial factors and their influence on medically confirmed health outcomes in workers: a systematic review.","authors":"Susel Rosário,&nbsp;João A Fonseca,&nbsp;Albert Nienhaus,&nbsp;José Torres da Costa","doi":"10.1186/s12995-016-0106-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Previous studies of psychosocial work factors have indicated their importance for workers' health. However, to what extent health problems can be attributed to the nature of the work environment or other psychosocial factors is not clear. No previous systematic review has used inclusion criteria based on specific medical evaluation of work-related health outcomes and the use of validated instruments for the assessment of the psychosocial (work) environment. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the evidence assessing the relationship between the psychosocial work environment and workers' health based on studies that used standardized and validated instruments to assess the psychosocial work environment and that focused on medically confirmed health outcomes. A systematic review of the literature was carried out by searching the databases PubMed, B-ON, Science Direct, Psycarticles, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection and the search engine (Google Scholar) using appropriate words for studies published from 2004 to 2014. This review follows the recommendations of the Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews (PRISMA). Studies were included in the review if data on psychosocial validated assessment method(s) for the study population and specific medical evaluation of health-related work outcome(s) were presented. In total, the search strategy yielded 10,623 references, of which 10 studies (seven prospective cohort and three cross-sectional) met the inclusion criteria. Most studies (7/10) observed an adverse effect of poor psychosocial work factors on workers' health: 3 on sickness absence, 4 on cardiovascular diseases. The other 3 studies reported detrimental effects on sleep and on disease-associated biomarkers. A more consistent effect was observed in studies of higher methodological quality that used a prospective design jointly with the use of validated instruments for the assessment of the psychosocial (work) environment and clinical evaluation. More prospective studies are needed to assess the evidence of work-related psychosocial factors on workers´ health. </p>","PeriodicalId":318500,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology (London, England)","volume":" ","pages":"19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12995-016-0106-9","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-016-0106-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

Previous studies of psychosocial work factors have indicated their importance for workers' health. However, to what extent health problems can be attributed to the nature of the work environment or other psychosocial factors is not clear. No previous systematic review has used inclusion criteria based on specific medical evaluation of work-related health outcomes and the use of validated instruments for the assessment of the psychosocial (work) environment. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the evidence assessing the relationship between the psychosocial work environment and workers' health based on studies that used standardized and validated instruments to assess the psychosocial work environment and that focused on medically confirmed health outcomes. A systematic review of the literature was carried out by searching the databases PubMed, B-ON, Science Direct, Psycarticles, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection and the search engine (Google Scholar) using appropriate words for studies published from 2004 to 2014. This review follows the recommendations of the Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews (PRISMA). Studies were included in the review if data on psychosocial validated assessment method(s) for the study population and specific medical evaluation of health-related work outcome(s) were presented. In total, the search strategy yielded 10,623 references, of which 10 studies (seven prospective cohort and three cross-sectional) met the inclusion criteria. Most studies (7/10) observed an adverse effect of poor psychosocial work factors on workers' health: 3 on sickness absence, 4 on cardiovascular diseases. The other 3 studies reported detrimental effects on sleep and on disease-associated biomarkers. A more consistent effect was observed in studies of higher methodological quality that used a prospective design jointly with the use of validated instruments for the assessment of the psychosocial (work) environment and clinical evaluation. More prospective studies are needed to assess the evidence of work-related psychosocial factors on workers´ health.

Abstract Image

社会心理因素的标准化评估及其对工人经医学证实的健康结果的影响:一项系统审查。
先前对社会心理工作因素的研究表明,这些因素对工人健康的重要性。然而,尚不清楚健康问题在多大程度上可归因于工作环境的性质或其他社会心理因素。以前的系统评价没有使用基于对工作相关健康结果的具体医学评价的纳入标准,也没有使用经过验证的工具来评估社会心理(工作)环境。本系统综述的目的是总结评估社会心理工作环境与工人健康之间关系的证据,这些证据基于使用标准化和经过验证的工具来评估社会心理工作环境并侧重于医学证实的健康结果的研究。通过检索PubMed、B-ON、Science Direct、Psycarticles、Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection等数据库和搜索引擎(Google Scholar)对2004年至2014年发表的研究进行系统综述。本次审查遵循报告系统审查声明(PRISMA)的建议。如果提供了针对研究人群的经社会心理验证的评估方法的数据以及对与健康有关的工作成果的具体医学评估,则将研究纳入本综述。检索策略共获得10623篇文献,其中10篇研究(7篇前瞻性队列研究和3篇横断面研究)符合纳入标准。大多数研究(7/10)观察到不良的社会心理工作因素对工人健康的不利影响:3项影响病假,4项影响心血管疾病。其他3项研究报告了对睡眠和疾病相关生物标志物的有害影响。在方法学质量较高的研究中观察到更一致的效果,这些研究使用前瞻性设计,并使用经过验证的工具来评估社会心理(工作)环境和临床评估。需要更多的前瞻性研究来评估与工作有关的社会心理因素对工人健康的影响。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信