Second Annual Conference „Occupational Disease Registry“ Sheba Hospital Tel Aviv, Feb. 27 2013 Health effects of an adverse psychosocial work environment: Scientific evidence and implications for monitoring and prevention Johannes Siegrist, PhD Senior Professor for Work Stress Research University of Duesseldorf, Germany Importance of work for health Work … provides a source of regular income and related opportunities provides a source of personal growth and training opportunities provides social identity, social status and related rewards enables access to social networks beyond primary groups influences a person’s self efficacy and self esteem exposes a person to differential quality of work environment Importance of work for health (cont.) • Job loss/ long-term unemployment is an established risk factor of elevated morbidity and mortality from addiction and stress-related disorders (esp. CVD, depression) (Gallo et al. 2004, Voss et al. 2004) • Yet, among employees with poorest quality of work mental health is getting significantly worse over time than in the case among unemployed people (Butterworth et al. 2011) Quality of work and health Traditional focus: workplace Chemical & physical hazards and specific ergonomic conditions reduce employees’ health and increase injury risk Domain of occupational medicine and safety Modern focus: work organization and employment conditions Specific features enhance or reduce employees’ health through psychosocial stress-related mechanisms Domain of ‚new‘ occupational health research and policy Significant changes in the nature of work and labour market Increase of work pressure, pace of work,and competition, including ‘high power work organization’ (impact of economic globalization) High demand for flexibility, mobility, and adaption of workers to new taks/technologies Fragmentation of occupational careers, de-standardized or atypical work, and growing job instability/insecurity Increase of service and IT professions/occupations with high psychomental/emotional workload Segmentation of labour market; social inequalities in quality of work and employment Effects of economic globalisation: Labour market consequences in developed countries Increased pressure of rationalisation (mainly due to wage competition) Downsizing, Merging, Outsourcing Work intensification Job insecurity Low wage / salary High work pressure (e.g. overtime work) and job instability (e.g. downsizing) are unhealthy! Examples of recent evidence: Overtime work (>11 hrs/day): risk of severe depression: HR 2.4 risk of incident CHD: HR 1.7 (Virtanen M et al. PLoS One 2012, Eur Heart J 2010) ‚Surviving‘ severe downsizing: risk of all-cause mortality: HR 1.4 risk of CHD mortality: HR 2.0 (Vahtera J et al. BMJ 2004) Work stress: How to identify toxic components within complex environments? negative emotions stress-related disorders stress responses Three theoretical models of a health-adverse psychosocial work environment Demand-control model (R. Karasek, 1979; R. Karasek & T. Theorell, 1990) Features of job tasks Effort-reward imbalance model (J. Siegrist, 1996; J. Siegrist et al., 2004) Features of work contracts Organizational justice model (J. Greenberg, 1990; M. Elovainio et al., 2002) Features of organizational procedures The demand-control model (R. Karasek 1979; R. Karasek & T. Theorell 1990) high low low Scope of decision/control Quantitative demands high low distress active high distress passive The Organizational Justice Model Procedural justice Perceptions of consistent, accurate, unbiased and ethical rules of procedures Relational justice Perceptions of polite, fair interactions from supervisors Distributive justice Perceptions of appropriate distribution of job tasks and gains among employees So far, mainly procedural and relational justice were measured with relevance to health and performance. The model of effort-reward imbalance (J. Siegrist 1996) Extrinsic components - labour income - career mobility / job security - esteem, respect demands / obligations reward effort motivation (‘overcommitment‘) motivation (‘overcommitment‘) Intrinsic component Relevance of the effort-reward imbalance model • It captures main features of modern work due to economic globalisation (competitive wages, high work pressure, low job security, lack of esteem). • It is based on an evolutionary old principle of human exchange (social reciprocity between give and take) with important implications for health and wellbeing. • It combines features of the work situation and of the working person. • It provides robust comparative information on adverse health effects of work stress due to its wide application in international studies. Measurement of the models Both models are measured by a standardized selfassessed questionnaire which can be applied to a variety of different occupational groups: - Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) (R. A. Karasek) www.workhealth.org - Effort-Reward Imbalance Questionnaire (ERI) (J. Siegrist) www.uniklinik-duesseldorf.de/Med-Soziologie Both questionnaires fulfill criteria of psychometric quality (factorial structure of scales, reliability, discriminant and predictive validity etc.). Both questionnaires are available in a number of languages and have been used in comparative international studies. Measurement of effort-reward imbalance at work Scale ‚effort‘ (6 Likert-scaled items) = perceived demands (Cronbach‘s α = .72) Scale ‚reward‘ (11 Likert-scaled items) = experienced or promised gratifications (Cronbach‘s α = .83) - 3 subscales:(a) salary and promotion, (b) esteem, (c) job security - ‚ratio effort/reward‘ = sum score ‚effort‘ / (sum score ‚reward‘ 6/11) Scale ‚overcommitment‘ (6 Likert-scaled items) = pattern of coping with demands and rewards (Cronbach‘s α = .76) For detailed information see: www.uniklinik-duesseldorf.de/Med-Soziologie Factorial structure of the ERI scales (confirmatory factor analysis) e ffo rt .6 6 (1 ) E R I1 .5 1 E R I2 .5 8 E R I3 .5 9 E R I4 .5 5 .6 7 (1 ) .7 5 (1 ) E R I7 E R I8 .4 9 e s te e m .6 4 .4 9 .7 5 .8 2 (1 ) -.3 3 .6 5 re w a rd w o rk s tre s s N=666 German employees E R I6 E R I9 E R I1 0 E R I1 5 jo b in s e c u rity .9 5 s a la ry / p ro m o tio n .8 0 (1 ) E R I1 2 .7 6 E R I1 3 .5 4 (1 ) E R I1 1 .6 5 .8 0 E R I1 4 E R I1 6 .6 2 E R I1 7 χ2/df GFI AGFI CFI RMSEA 2.99 .91 .89 .90 .06 .7 5 .5 1 (1 ) .7 4 o v e rc o m m itm e n t OC1 OC2 .1 9 OC3 .6 4 OC4 .8 6 OC5 .6 9 OC6 Source: A. Rödel et al. (2004) Z diff diagn Psychol 25: 227-238 Explanatory contributions of single and combined scales, Swedish cohort study (SLOSH) Association of ERI (2006) with self-rated health (2008): • • • • Effort (highest quartile) OR 2.60 (1.52-4.44) Reward (lowest quartile) OR 2.25 (1.30-3.89) E/R-Ratio (highest quart.) OR 4.43 (2.33-8.43) Overcommitment ( „ „ ) OR 3.79 (2.06-6.94) ORs adj. For age, sex, education, income, and baseline SRH Source: C. Leineweber et al. Occup Environ Med 2010, 67: 526 E/R-ratio Sensitivity and specificity of ERI scales: Cut-point of the ER-ratio Source: D. Lehr et al. (2010) J Occup Organizat Psychol 83: 251-261 The social gradient of work stress in the European workforce (age 50-65): SHARE-study Social gradient of work stress 40 Percent high stressed 35 30 Very low 25 Low 20 Medium High 15 Very high 10 5 0 Effort-Reward Imbalance Low control Source: Wahrendorf M et al. (2012) European Sociological Review, DOI: 10.1093/esr/jcs058, What is the scientific evidence of a direct association of work stress with disease? Methodological approaches: epidemiological and experimental Epidemiological research: prospective observational cohort study (gold standard) cross-sectional and case-control-study (weaker evidence) intervention study (limited options) Experimental research: laboratory experiments (limited ecological validity) ambulatory monitoring at work (limited control) Public health relevance of stress-related disorders Focus on coronary heart disease and depression „By the year 2020 depression and coronary heart disease will be the leading causes of premature death and of life years defined by disability (DALY‘s) worldwide.“ (Murray and Lopez 1996) Work stress (effort reward imbalance/job control) and CHD incidence, men and women: Whitehall II-Study 3 3 * 2.5 2 2 1.5 1.5 1 1 0.5 0.5 No work stress * 2.5 High effort or High effort low reward and low reward No work stress Intermediate job control Low job control adjusted for age, sex, length of follow-up + alternative work stress model + grade, coronary risk factors, negative affect Source: H. Bosma et al. (1998), Amer J Publ Health, 88: 68-74 * p < .05 Meta-analysis of cohort studies on relative risks of coronary heart disease due to ’job strain’ 4/9 Decreases risk Increases risk Source: Kivimaki et al. Scand J Work Environ Health (2006): 32: 431. 4-year increase In plaque height (mm) Workplace demands, economic reward, and 4-year progression of carotid atherosclerosis (plaque height) in 940 Finnish men 0.35 0.33 0.3 0.25 0.27 high 0.27 0.26 low 0.2 low high Economic rewards Source: J. Lynch et al. (1997), Circulation, 96: 302 p = .04 (adj.) Psychosocial stress at work in Chinese male coronary patients vs. healthy controls (N=388) 6 5 4 low middle high 3 2 1 0 Effort-Reward Imbalance Adjusted for age, and sex; Additionally adjusted for hypertension, diabetes mellitus, smoking, BMI, CHD family history, educational level, and marital status; *p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001 Source: Xu W. et al (2009) J Occup Health 51: 107-113 Mean systolic blood pressure (mmHg) in men over a working day according to overcommitment and occupational grade (N=105) 140 overcommitment +, occup. grade low mmHg 135 130 overcommitment +, occup. grade high 125 overcommitment -, occup. grade high 120 overcommitment -, occup. grade low morning noon afternoon evening Source: A. Steptoe et al. (2004), Psychosomatic Medicine, 66: 323-329. Inflammatory response (CRP) during experimentally induced mental stress according to level of effortreward imbalance (N=92) 0.12 CRP change# (μg/ml) as function of effortreward imbalance p < .05 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 # adjusted for age, BMI, baseline levels 0.00 low medium high effort-reward imbalance Evidence from prospective cohort studies: elevated risks of depression Demand-control model: • 12 of 14 studies: OR varying from 1.2 to 3.4 (full model or components) Effort-reward imbalance model: • 9 studies: OR varying from 1.5 to 4.6 (full model or components) Organisational justice model: • 11 studies: OR varying from 1.2 to 2.4 (single components) Work stress (demand-control-model) and incidence of severe depressive symptoms (5 years, N=4.133) Multivariate relative risiks* of the following components: Women • Low decision latitude • Low social support RR 1.96 RR 1.92 CI 1.10;3.47 CI 1.33;3.26 Men • High job insecurity RR 2.09 CI 1.04;4.20 *adj. for age, depression at baseline and additional confounders Source: R. Rugulies et al. (2006), Am J Epidemiol, 163: 877. 1-year incidence on major depression and work stress quartiles (ERI) Canada (n = 2752, men and women) Source: J Wang (2012): Am J Epidemiol 176: 52-59. Psychosocial stress at work and depressive symptoms: 13.128 employed men and women 50-64 yrs. from 17 countries in three continents (SHARE, ELSA, HRS, JSTAR) 2,5 * * * 2 * * 1,5 ERI Low control 1 0,5 0 USA (N=1560) Europa (N=10342) Japan (N=1226) Source: J. Siegrist et al (2012) Globalization and Health 8:27. Moderation of effort-reward imbalance (ERI) on severe depressive symptoms by SES (N = 1729) ‚Danish Work Environment Cohort‘ study Logistic regression analysis: Model: adj. for gender, age, family status, survey method, health behaviours (smoking, heavy alcohol consumption, leisure time physical activity), self-rated health, sleep disturbances and non-severe depressive symptom score (53–100) at baseline Source: Rugulies et al (2012) Eur J Public Health (in press) N=8609: SHARELIFE Source: Wahrendorf M et al. 2013: Adv. Life Course Res 18:16-25. Morning cortisol after dexamethasone-test in teachers with or without work stress (N=135) Source: Bellingrath S et al (2008) Biol Psychol 78: 104-113 Work stress (ERI) and natural killer cells in 347 Japanese employees Source: Nakata A et al (2011) Effort-reward imbalance, overcommitment, and cellular immune measures among white-collar employees. Biol Psychol 88: 270-279 Reduced fatigue and depression is associated with retirement event (GAZEL-study) Source: Westerlund H et al (2010) BMJ 341:c6149. Employee work time control and risk of disability pension: the Finnish Public Sector Study. Worktime control (self-assessed and co-worker assessed) from a survey in 2000-2001; 30 700 employees (78% women) aged 18-64 years. Information on disability pension during 4.4 y follow-up was collected from national registers. 1178 employees were granted disability pensions. Most common causes: musculoskeletal disorders (43% of all pensions) and mental disorders (25%). A one unit increase in worktime control score was associated with a 41-48% decrease in risk of disabling musculoskeletal disorders in men and a 33-35% decrease in women. This association was robust to adjustment for 17 baseline covariates Source: Vahtera Occup Environ Med. 2010 Jul;67(7):479-85 Cumulative hazard of early retirement on health ground in general (upper part) and specifically due to musculosceletal disorders by quartile of worktime control. (Vahtera 2010) Summary: Main features of health promoting work • Challenging task profile providing autonomy, control and opportunities of personal development • Appropriate material and non-material rewards in return to accomplished achievements • Trusting, fair and supportive relationships at work • Meaningful and secure employment Actions towards strengthening a culture of prevention at different levels Legislation, Regulation, Social movements Employer initiated new systems of work organization, Collective bargaining Employer initiated job redesign, Labor-management committees, Action research Economic, political context Organizational context Job insecurity, Downsizing Precarious work New systems of work organization Job characteristics Low job control / reward High job demands / effort Stress response Health promotion, Stress management Treatment, Rehabilitation, Return-to-Work programs Physiological effects (e.g., BP ) Psychological effects (e.g., burnout) Health behaviors Illness Framework for psychosocial risk management at the workplace: PRIMA-EF (S. Leka, T. Cox 2008) Promoting a unified approach of validated measures towards effective management of psychosocial risks and of strengthening (mental) health and safety at the workplace Cyclic process (assess, plan, act, evaluate, modify or establish) Supported at level of enterprises by regulatory standards (e.g. national, EU), voluntary agreements and social partner dialogues Initiate and promote models of good practice (e.g. Scandinavian countries, NE, UK) Models of good practice: the case of Denmark (M.Bogehus Rasmussen et al. (2011) Safety Science 49:565-74) New strategy launched by the Danish Working Environment Authority in 2007 to strengthen and qualify primary prevention of work related stress Trained WEA inspectors assess sector-specific guidance tools in all Danish enterprises as part of their regular work. Collection of data in combination with information on available preventive activities; data analysis in collaboration with NRCWE in Copenhagen Feedback to enterprises and discussion of implementation, together with experts and social partners WHO Global Framework of Healthy Workplaces http://www.who.int/occupational_health/publications/healthy_workplaces_model. pdf Improved control and autonomy over work time and sickness absence (SA) Adj. rel. SA-risk (during 28 months) Work stress (ERI) + Control of daily work schedule 23 % Work stress (ERI) + Lack of control of daily work schedule 39 % Work stress (ERI) + Control of free days at work 12 % Work stress (ERI) + No control of free days at work 43 % Source: Ala Mursala L. et al. (2005) J Epidemiol Community Health 59: 851-857; N=16.000) Work stress and health problems after structural intervention* Means at t1 adj. for t0 Variable Demand Control Supervisor support Coworker support ERI Psychol. distress Work-rel. burnout experimental - control hospital 12.08 68.59 10.82 12.49 1.10 21.17 46.66 12.68 68.06 10.42 12.26 1.15 22.43 49.03 p .015 .382 .028 .056 .002 .205 .034 *12 month-follow-up, two Canadian hospitals, N=302 (intervention) vs. 311 (control hospital) (ANCOVA, adj. for baseline values) Source: R. Bourbonnais et al. (2006), Occup Environ Med, 63: 335. Macro indicators of national labour and social policies and mean level of work-stress in 13 European countries (SHARE study) Macro indicator: Percentage of workers participating in further education. Source: Siegrist J., Wahrendorf M. (2011) in: The Individual and the Welfare State (ed. A. Börsch-Supan et al.) Springer Heidelberg National welfare state programs Association between employment rate of women and quality of work (ratio effort and reward) Results from four national aging studies (SHARE, ELSA, HRS, JSTAR) Source: unpublished results (2013) T. Lunau, N. Dragano, J. Siegrist Effects of stressful work on depressive symptoms: variation according to welfare system (SHARE)? 3 Odds ratio 2 no yes 1 0 social democratic conservative liberal Effort-Reward imbalance social democratic conservative liberal Low conctrol Stressful work: Tertiles, effort-reward ratio or low control Depressive symptoms: Odds ratios adjusted for SEP, age and gender. Source: Dragano N et al (2011) J Epidemiol Community Health 65: 793-799. Conclusions I • Robust scientific evidence of elevated risks of CHD and depression among employees exposed to stressful psychosocial work (DC, ERI, OJ) • Additional studies demonstrate associations of stressful work with musculoskeletal disorders, sleep disturbances, poor health functioning, alcohol dependence, sickness absence, and disability pension • Even if the relative attributable risk of each of these health outcomes with regard to stressful work is rather small (e.g. CHD: 5% - 15%; depression: 10% - 20%), a significant part of this burden of disease could theoretically be prevented by strengthening healthy work Conclusions II • Given substantial direct and indirects costs of the burden of disease attibutable to unhealthy work, increased investments into evidence based primary and secondary preventive programs at work are strongly recommended • Preliminary findings from intervention trials point to a business case, i.e. relevant return on investment within 3 to 4 years Recommendations of strengthening prevention at work (WHO-Euro Review 2013) • Improving quality of work among occupations with high prevalence of exposure to health-adverse working conditions: – strengthening occupational health services and respective monitoring and risk management activities – enforcing regulations and voluntary agreements between social partners – supporting the implementation of best practice models of healthy work. • Promoting return-to-work programmes, availability of appropriate rehabilitation services and sufficient benefits for disabled workers and other groups who are excluded from regular work, without compromising principles of basic social protection. . Thank you!