Understanding work participation among employees with common mental disorders: What works, for whom, under what circumstances and how? A systematic realist review protocol

What works, how and in which contexts when supporting parents to implement intensive speech and language therapy at home for children with speech sound disorder? A protocol for a realist review

INTRODUCTION

Speech and language therapists (SLTs) worldwide report challenges with providing recommended, evidence-based intervention intensity for children with speech sound disorder (SSD). Challenges such as service constraints and/or family contexts impact on access to optimal therapy intensity. Existing research indicates that empowering and training parents to deliver intervention at home, alongside SLT support, offers one possible solution to increasing the intensity of intervention children with SSD receive. Digital health could increase accessibility to intensive home practice and help sustain engagement with therapy activities. Further exploration is needed around what makes parent-implemented interventions for children with SSD effective, for who and in which situations. This paper outlines the protocol for a realist review which aims to explore the active ingredients and contextual factors of effective digital parent-led interventions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A realist review will explore the research question, following six stages. The scope of the review will be determined, and initial programme theories will be developed about what works in digital parent-implemented interventions for SSD, for whom, how, why and in what circumstances. Relevant secondary data, identified through a formal search strategy, will be selected, appraised, analysed and synthesised using realist principles to test and further refine the initial programme theories. This process will develop refined underpinning explanatory theories which capture the interaction between contexts, mechanisms and outcomes of the intervention. An expert steering group will provide insight to inform explanatory theories, searches, and dissemination.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required for this review. The refined programme theories from the review will inform the next stages of a wider study. A subsequent realist evaluation will test and further refine theories with key stakeholders. Following this, the underpinning programme theory will be used to coproduce a digital tool, to support parents to deliver home intervention alongside SLT support.

A classification of human resource management bundles for the inclusion of vulnerable workers

BACKGROUND

Despite the societal importance to improve understanding of the role of employers in the inclusion of workers with a distance to the labor market, scant knowledge is available on the effectiveness of human resource management (HRM) bundles for the inclusion of vulnerable workers.

OBJECTIVE

This paper studies which HRM bundles are applied by employers that hired people with a distance to the labor market, and to what extent these different bundles of HRM practices are related to employment of workers with specific vulnerabilities, such as people with disabilities or people with a migration background.

METHODS

A latent class analysis of 1,665 inclusive employers was used to identify HRM bundles based on seven HRM practices: financial support practices, specialized recruitment, promotion and career opportunities, training opportunities, part-time work, job crafting, and adaptations to the workplace.

RESULTS

Six bundles were identified: a recruitment and development bundle (34.4% of employers), a development bundle (24.8%), maintenance-focused practices (16.5%), a recruitment bundle (9.4%), a sustainable employment bundle (8.9%), and passive HRM (6.0%). Post-hoc analyses showed the probability of hiring specific vulnerable groups for each bundle (e.g., sustainable employment bundles showed the highest overall probability to hire people with a physical disability).

CONCLUSION

Nuancing what is suggested in strategic HRM literature, we conclude that both extensive HRM and focused HRM bundles can be successful for the employment of vulnerable workers. In conclusion, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to inclusive employment and employers, large or small, can tailor their HRM systems to include vulnerable workers.

Strengthening supervisor support for employees with common mental health problems: developing a workplace intervention using intervention mapping

Background

This study presents the development of a workplace intervention to strengthen supervisor’s support for employees with common mental health problems (CMHP). CMHP have been increasing over the last years, resulting into negative work outcomes, such as absenteeism or reduced work performance. To date, organisational interventions have been promising in preventing these negative work outcomes, however it is yet unknown in what way the role of workplace stakeholders, in particular supervisors, can be strengthened. This study contributes to the literature of interventions on an organizational level which uses a preventative approach by promoting stay at work among employees with CMHP through supervisor support.

Methods

we applied the intervention mapping (IM) approach, by actively involving workplace stakeholders (employees with CMHP, supervisors and occupational health professionals) through the development process and the use of Integrated model of behaviour prediction for employers. All six steps of IM are followed and thematic analysis was used to analyse interviews and focus groups.

Results

Based on a comprehensive needs assessment, the intervention resulted in an online guideline, with five step-wise themes on how to support employees with CMHP to stay at work (SAW). The guideline addressed the most important and changeable actions using the Integrated model of behaviour prediction. The guideline presents how to signal and address problems in the workplace and find solutions by stimulating autonomy of employees, explore job accommodations and ask for occupational support. In addition, basic conditions on how to create mentally healthy workplaces were presented. Coaching sessions by occupational health professionals, that include practical strategies using the best available evidence, were identified by the stakeholders.

Conclusions

This SAW-Supervisor Guideline-intervention responds to the need of supervisors to be supported in their role, responsibility and ways to support employees with mental health issues, through a behaviour-oriented, preventative approach. Intervention mapping provided a systematic process to identify, structure and prioritize factors of supervisor support, resulting in a novel workplace intervention. The active involvement of workplace stakeholders throughout the process resulted into a well-received intervention. The theoretical framework provided practical ways to induce supportive behaviour of supervisors, bridging theory with practice.

Promoting Factors to Stay at Work Among Employees With Common Mental Health Problems: A Multiple-Stakeholder Concept Mapping Study

Most individuals affected by common mental health problems are employed and actually working. To promote stay at work by workplace interventions, it is crucial to understand the factors perceived by various workplace stakeholders, and its relative importance. This concept mapping study therefore explores perspectives of employees with common mental health problems (n = 18), supervisors (n = 17), and occupational health professionals (n = 14). Per stakeholder group, participants were interviewed to generate statements. Next, each participant sorted these statements on relatedness and importance. For each group, a concept map was created, using cluster analysis. Finally, focus group discussions were held to refine the maps. The three concept maps resulted in several clustered ideas that stakeholders had in common, grouped by thematic analysis into the following meta-clusters: (A) Employee’s experience of autonomy in work (employee’s responsibility, freedom to exert control, meaningful work), (B) Supervisor support (being proactive, connected, and involved), (C) Ways to match employee’s capacities to work (job accommodations), (D) Safe social climate in workplace (transparent organizational culture, collective responsibility in teams, collegial support), and (E) professional and organizational support, including collaboration with occupational health professionals. Promoting stay at work is a dynamic process that requires joined efforts by workplace stakeholders, in which more attention is needed to the interpersonal dynamics between employer and employee. Above all, a safe and trustful work environment, in which employee’s autonomy, capacities, and needs are addressed by the supervisor, forms a fundamental base to stay at work.