An international comparison of occupational health guidelines for the management of mental disorders and stress-related psychological symptoms

M.C.W. Joosen, E.P.M. Brouwers, K.M. van Beurden-Berkers, B. Terluin, J.H. Ruotsalainen, J. Woo, K.S. Choi, H. Eguchi, J. Moriguchi, J.J.L. van der Klink, J. van Weeghel

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

Background
We compared available guidelines on the management of mental disorders and stress-related psychological symptoms in an occupational healthcare setting and determined their development and reporting quality.
Methods
To identify eligible guidelines, we systematically searched National Guideline Clearinghouse, Guidelines International Network Library and PubMed. Members of the International Commission on Occupational Health (ICOH), were also consulted. Guidelines recommendations were compared and reporting quality was assessed using the AGREE II instrument.
Results
Of 2126 titles retrieved, 14 guidelines were included: 1 Japanese, 2 Finnish, 2 Korean, 2 British and 7 Dutch. Four guidelines were of high-reporting quality. Best described was the Scope and Purpose, and the poorest described were competing interests (Editorial independence) and barriers and facilitators for implementation (Applicability). Key recommendations were often difficult to identify. Most guidelines recommend employing an inventory of symptoms, diagnostic classification, performance problems and workplace factors. All guidelines recommend specific return-to-work interventions, and most agreed on psychological treatment and communication between involved stakeholders.
Discussion
Practice guidelines to address work disability due to mental disorders and stress-related symptoms are available in various countries around the world, however, these guidelines are difficult to find. To promote sharing, national guidelines should be accessible via established international databases. The quality of the guideline's developmental process varied considerably. To increase quality and applicability, guideline developers should adopt a common structure for the development and reporting of their guidelines, for example Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria. Owing to differences in social systems, developers can learn from each other through reviews of this kind.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)313-322
JournalOccupational and Environmental Medicine
Volume72
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Fingerprint

Occupational Health
Practice Guidelines
PubMed
Workplace
Libraries

Cite this

@article{827b953a1f5a46b68bc0b4e5c9ad292e,
title = "An international comparison of occupational health guidelines for the management of mental disorders and stress-related psychological symptoms",
abstract = "Background We compared available guidelines on the management of mental disorders and stress-related psychological symptoms in an occupational healthcare setting and determined their development and reporting quality.Methods To identify eligible guidelines, we systematically searched National Guideline Clearinghouse, Guidelines International Network Library and PubMed. Members of the International Commission on Occupational Health (ICOH), were also consulted. Guidelines recommendations were compared and reporting quality was assessed using the AGREE II instrument.Results Of 2126 titles retrieved, 14 guidelines were included: 1 Japanese, 2 Finnish, 2 Korean, 2 British and 7 Dutch. Four guidelines were of high-reporting quality. Best described was the Scope and Purpose, and the poorest described were competing interests (Editorial independence) and barriers and facilitators for implementation (Applicability). Key recommendations were often difficult to identify. Most guidelines recommend employing an inventory of symptoms, diagnostic classification, performance problems and workplace factors. All guidelines recommend specific return-to-work interventions, and most agreed on psychological treatment and communication between involved stakeholders.Discussion Practice guidelines to address work disability due to mental disorders and stress-related symptoms are available in various countries around the world, however, these guidelines are difficult to find. To promote sharing, national guidelines should be accessible via established international databases. The quality of the guideline's developmental process varied considerably. To increase quality and applicability, guideline developers should adopt a common structure for the development and reporting of their guidelines, for example Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria. Owing to differences in social systems, developers can learn from each other through reviews of this kind.",
author = "M.C.W. Joosen and E.P.M. Brouwers and {van Beurden-Berkers}, K.M. and B. Terluin and J.H. Ruotsalainen and J. Woo and K.S. Choi and H. Eguchi and J. Moriguchi and {van der Klink}, J.J.L. and {van Weeghel}, J.",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1136/oemed-2013-101626",
language = "English",
volume = "72",
pages = "313--322",
journal = "Occupational and Environmental Medicine",
issn = "1351-0711",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "5",

}

An international comparison of occupational health guidelines for the management of mental disorders and stress-related psychological symptoms. / Joosen, M.C.W.; Brouwers, E.P.M.; van Beurden-Berkers, K.M.; Terluin, B.; Ruotsalainen, J.H.; Woo, J.; Choi, K.S.; Eguchi, H.; Moriguchi, J.; van der Klink, J.J.L.; van Weeghel, J.

In: Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 72, No. 5, 2015, p. 313-322.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - An international comparison of occupational health guidelines for the management of mental disorders and stress-related psychological symptoms

AU - Joosen, M.C.W.

AU - Brouwers, E.P.M.

AU - van Beurden-Berkers, K.M.

AU - Terluin, B.

AU - Ruotsalainen, J.H.

AU - Woo, J.

AU - Choi, K.S.

AU - Eguchi, H.

AU - Moriguchi, J.

AU - van der Klink, J.J.L.

AU - van Weeghel, J.

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Background We compared available guidelines on the management of mental disorders and stress-related psychological symptoms in an occupational healthcare setting and determined their development and reporting quality.Methods To identify eligible guidelines, we systematically searched National Guideline Clearinghouse, Guidelines International Network Library and PubMed. Members of the International Commission on Occupational Health (ICOH), were also consulted. Guidelines recommendations were compared and reporting quality was assessed using the AGREE II instrument.Results Of 2126 titles retrieved, 14 guidelines were included: 1 Japanese, 2 Finnish, 2 Korean, 2 British and 7 Dutch. Four guidelines were of high-reporting quality. Best described was the Scope and Purpose, and the poorest described were competing interests (Editorial independence) and barriers and facilitators for implementation (Applicability). Key recommendations were often difficult to identify. Most guidelines recommend employing an inventory of symptoms, diagnostic classification, performance problems and workplace factors. All guidelines recommend specific return-to-work interventions, and most agreed on psychological treatment and communication between involved stakeholders.Discussion Practice guidelines to address work disability due to mental disorders and stress-related symptoms are available in various countries around the world, however, these guidelines are difficult to find. To promote sharing, national guidelines should be accessible via established international databases. The quality of the guideline's developmental process varied considerably. To increase quality and applicability, guideline developers should adopt a common structure for the development and reporting of their guidelines, for example Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria. Owing to differences in social systems, developers can learn from each other through reviews of this kind.

AB - Background We compared available guidelines on the management of mental disorders and stress-related psychological symptoms in an occupational healthcare setting and determined their development and reporting quality.Methods To identify eligible guidelines, we systematically searched National Guideline Clearinghouse, Guidelines International Network Library and PubMed. Members of the International Commission on Occupational Health (ICOH), were also consulted. Guidelines recommendations were compared and reporting quality was assessed using the AGREE II instrument.Results Of 2126 titles retrieved, 14 guidelines were included: 1 Japanese, 2 Finnish, 2 Korean, 2 British and 7 Dutch. Four guidelines were of high-reporting quality. Best described was the Scope and Purpose, and the poorest described were competing interests (Editorial independence) and barriers and facilitators for implementation (Applicability). Key recommendations were often difficult to identify. Most guidelines recommend employing an inventory of symptoms, diagnostic classification, performance problems and workplace factors. All guidelines recommend specific return-to-work interventions, and most agreed on psychological treatment and communication between involved stakeholders.Discussion Practice guidelines to address work disability due to mental disorders and stress-related symptoms are available in various countries around the world, however, these guidelines are difficult to find. To promote sharing, national guidelines should be accessible via established international databases. The quality of the guideline's developmental process varied considerably. To increase quality and applicability, guideline developers should adopt a common structure for the development and reporting of their guidelines, for example Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria. Owing to differences in social systems, developers can learn from each other through reviews of this kind.

U2 - 10.1136/oemed-2013-101626

DO - 10.1136/oemed-2013-101626

M3 - Review article

VL - 72

SP - 313

EP - 322

JO - Occupational and Environmental Medicine

JF - Occupational and Environmental Medicine

SN - 1351-0711

IS - 5

ER -