Evidence for implementation of interventions to promote mental health in the workplace: a systematic scoping review protocol.
Barriers and facilitators
Implementation science
Mental health promotion
Organisational interventions
Process evaluation
RE-AIM
Scoping review
Wellbeing promotion
Workplace
Workplace interventions
Journal
Systematic reviews
ISSN: 2046-4053
Titre abrégé: Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101580575
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 01 2021
28 01 2021
Historique:
received:
05
08
2020
accepted:
21
12
2020
entrez:
29
1
2021
pubmed:
30
1
2021
medline:
25
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Mental health problems are common in the working population and represent a growing concern internationally, with potential impacts on workers, organisations, workplace health and compensation authorities, labour markets and social policies. Workplace interventions that create workplaces supportive of mental health, promote mental health awareness, destigmatise mental illness and support those with mental disorders are likely to improve health and economical outcomes for employees and organisations. Identifying factors associated with successful implementation of these interventions can improve intervention quality and evaluation, and facilitate the uptake and expansion. Therefore, we aim to review research reporting on the implementation of mental health promotion interventions delivered in workplace settings, in order to increase understanding of factors influencing successful delivery. A scoping review will be conducted incorporating a stepwise methodology to identify relevant literature reviews, primary research and grey literature. This review is registered with Research Registry (reviewregistry897). One reviewer will conduct the search to identify English language studies in the following electronic databases from 2008 through to July 1, 2020: Scopus, PROSPERO, Health Technology Assessments, PubMed, Campbell Collaboration, Joanna Briggs Library, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL and Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH). Reference searching, Google Scholar, Grey Matters, IOSH and expert contacts will be used to identify grey literature. Two reviewers will screen title and abstracts, aiming for 95% agreement, and then independently screen full texts for inclusion. Two reviewers will assess methodological quality of included studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and extract and synthesize data in line with the RE-AIM framework, Nielson and Randall's model of organisational-level interventions and Moore's sustainability criteria, if the data allows. We will recruit and consult with international experts in the field to ensure engagement, reach and relevance of the main findings. This will be the first systematic scoping review to identify and synthesise evidence of barriers and facilitators to implementing mental health promotion interventions in workplace settings. Our results will inform future evaluation studies and randomised controlled trials and highlight gaps in the evidence base. Research Registry ( reviewregistry897 ).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Mental health problems are common in the working population and represent a growing concern internationally, with potential impacts on workers, organisations, workplace health and compensation authorities, labour markets and social policies. Workplace interventions that create workplaces supportive of mental health, promote mental health awareness, destigmatise mental illness and support those with mental disorders are likely to improve health and economical outcomes for employees and organisations. Identifying factors associated with successful implementation of these interventions can improve intervention quality and evaluation, and facilitate the uptake and expansion. Therefore, we aim to review research reporting on the implementation of mental health promotion interventions delivered in workplace settings, in order to increase understanding of factors influencing successful delivery.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS
A scoping review will be conducted incorporating a stepwise methodology to identify relevant literature reviews, primary research and grey literature. This review is registered with Research Registry (reviewregistry897). One reviewer will conduct the search to identify English language studies in the following electronic databases from 2008 through to July 1, 2020: Scopus, PROSPERO, Health Technology Assessments, PubMed, Campbell Collaboration, Joanna Briggs Library, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL and Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH). Reference searching, Google Scholar, Grey Matters, IOSH and expert contacts will be used to identify grey literature. Two reviewers will screen title and abstracts, aiming for 95% agreement, and then independently screen full texts for inclusion. Two reviewers will assess methodological quality of included studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and extract and synthesize data in line with the RE-AIM framework, Nielson and Randall's model of organisational-level interventions and Moore's sustainability criteria, if the data allows. We will recruit and consult with international experts in the field to ensure engagement, reach and relevance of the main findings.
DISCUSSION
This will be the first systematic scoping review to identify and synthesise evidence of barriers and facilitators to implementing mental health promotion interventions in workplace settings. Our results will inform future evaluation studies and randomised controlled trials and highlight gaps in the evidence base.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
Research Registry ( reviewregistry897 ).
Identifiants
pubmed: 33509258
doi: 10.1186/s13643-020-01570-9
pii: 10.1186/s13643-020-01570-9
pmc: PMC7844910
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
41Références
Chiropr Man Therap. 2019 Oct 9;27:48
pubmed: 31624537
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2015;109(2):97-102
pubmed: 26028446
BMJ. 2008 Sep 29;337:a1655
pubmed: 18824488
Occup Environ Med. 2018 Apr;75(4):243-244
pubmed: 29363558
J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Jul;75:40-6
pubmed: 27005575
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 19;18(1):143
pubmed: 30453902
BMJ. 2015 Mar 19;350:h1258
pubmed: 25791983
Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 20;4:55
pubmed: 25903158
BMC Public Health. 2017 Jun 19;17(1):584
pubmed: 28629352
Ann Intern Med. 2018 Oct 2;169(7):467-473
pubmed: 30178033
Syst Rev. 2016 Dec 5;5(1):210
pubmed: 27919275
BMC Public Health. 2015 Aug 01;15:738
pubmed: 26232123
Front Public Health. 2019 Mar 29;7:64
pubmed: 30984733
Occup Med (Lond). 2010 Sep;60(6):414-5
pubmed: 20719967
Implement Sci. 2017 Sep 2;12(1):110
pubmed: 28865479
Int J Nurs Stud. 2012 Jan;49(1):47-53
pubmed: 21835406
Syst Rev. 2020 Apr 24;9(1):90
pubmed: 32331529
Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 01;4:1
pubmed: 25554246
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Sep 4;9:CD013458
pubmed: 32885850
Implement Sci. 2010 Sep 20;5:69
pubmed: 20854677
Syst Rev. 2019 Nov 7;8(1):266
pubmed: 31699136
Scand J Work Environ Health. 2017 Jul 1;43(4):294-306
pubmed: 28306759
BMJ Open. 2012 Sep 01;2(5):
pubmed: 22942232
BMC Psychiatry. 2014 May 09;14:131
pubmed: 24884425
Health Expect. 2013 Dec;16(4):323-37
pubmed: 22390732