Developing a framework for evaluation: a Theory of Change for complex workplace mental health interventions.
Complex interventions
Evaluation
Implementation
Intervention development
MENTUPP
Medical Research Council framework
Organizational interventions
Theory of Change, Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs)
Workplace-based mental health/health interventions
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 06 2023
17 06 2023
Historique:
received:
16
06
2022
accepted:
09
06
2023
medline:
19
6
2023
pubmed:
18
6
2023
entrez:
17
6
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There is a gap between the necessity of effective mental health interventions in the workplace and the availability of evidence-based information on how to evaluate them. The available evidence outlines that mental health interventions should follow integrated approaches combining multiple components related to different levels of change. However, there is a lack of robust studies on how to evaluate multicomponent workplace interventions which target a variety of outcomes at different levels taking into account the influence of different implementation contexts. We use the MENTUPP project as a research context to develop a theory-driven approach to facilitate the evaluation of complex mental health interventions in occupational settings and to provide a comprehensive rationale of how these types of interventions are expected to achieve change. We used a participatory approach to develop a ToC involving a large number of the project team representing multiple academic backgrounds exploiting in tandem the knowledge from six systematic reviews and results from a survey among practitioners and academic experts in the field of mental health in SMEs. The ToC revealed four long-term outcomes that we assume MENTUPP can achieve in the workplace: 1) improved mental wellbeing and reduced burnout, 2) reduced mental illness, 3) reduced mental illness-related stigma, and 4) reduced productivity losses. They are assumed to be reached through six proximate and four intermediate outcomes according to a specific chronological order. The intervention consists of 23 components that were chosen based on specific rationales to achieve change on four levels (employee, team, leader, and organization). The ToC map provides a theory of how MENTUPP is expected to achieve its anticipated long-term outcomes through intermediate and proximate outcomes assessing alongside contextual factors which will facilitate the testing of hypotheses. Moreover, it allows for a structured approach to informing the future selection of outcomes and related evaluation measures in either subsequent iterations of complex interventions or other similarly structured programs. Hence, the resulting ToC can be employed by future research as an example for the development of a theoretical framework to evaluate complex mental health interventions in the workplace.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
There is a gap between the necessity of effective mental health interventions in the workplace and the availability of evidence-based information on how to evaluate them. The available evidence outlines that mental health interventions should follow integrated approaches combining multiple components related to different levels of change. However, there is a lack of robust studies on how to evaluate multicomponent workplace interventions which target a variety of outcomes at different levels taking into account the influence of different implementation contexts.
METHOD
We use the MENTUPP project as a research context to develop a theory-driven approach to facilitate the evaluation of complex mental health interventions in occupational settings and to provide a comprehensive rationale of how these types of interventions are expected to achieve change. We used a participatory approach to develop a ToC involving a large number of the project team representing multiple academic backgrounds exploiting in tandem the knowledge from six systematic reviews and results from a survey among practitioners and academic experts in the field of mental health in SMEs.
RESULTS
The ToC revealed four long-term outcomes that we assume MENTUPP can achieve in the workplace: 1) improved mental wellbeing and reduced burnout, 2) reduced mental illness, 3) reduced mental illness-related stigma, and 4) reduced productivity losses. They are assumed to be reached through six proximate and four intermediate outcomes according to a specific chronological order. The intervention consists of 23 components that were chosen based on specific rationales to achieve change on four levels (employee, team, leader, and organization).
CONCLUSIONS
The ToC map provides a theory of how MENTUPP is expected to achieve its anticipated long-term outcomes through intermediate and proximate outcomes assessing alongside contextual factors which will facilitate the testing of hypotheses. Moreover, it allows for a structured approach to informing the future selection of outcomes and related evaluation measures in either subsequent iterations of complex interventions or other similarly structured programs. Hence, the resulting ToC can be employed by future research as an example for the development of a theoretical framework to evaluate complex mental health interventions in the workplace.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37330460
doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-16092-x
pii: 10.1186/s12889-023-16092-x
pmc: PMC10276374
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1171Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Syst Rev. 2021 Jan 28;10(1):41
pubmed: 33509258
Disabil Rehabil. 2022 Dec;44(25):7791-7801
pubmed: 34762548
BMC Geriatr. 2018 Feb 14;18(1):47
pubmed: 29444645
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jan 15;19(2):
pubmed: 35055773
J Affect Disord. 2021 Jul 1;290:378-386
pubmed: 34082284
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Aug 26;20(1):801
pubmed: 32847580
Trials. 2014 Jul 05;15:267
pubmed: 24996765
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2013 Oct 15;10(10):5062-82
pubmed: 24132134
Am Psychol. 2012 Apr;67(3):231-43
pubmed: 22040221
Stress Health. 2016 Aug;32(3):201-15
pubmed: 25044861
Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:414832
pubmed: 26557665
Implement Sci. 2016 May 06;11:63
pubmed: 27153985
Front Psychiatry. 2021 Mar 26;12:631032
pubmed: 33841203
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2018 Jan;52(1):15-23
pubmed: 28835112
J Occup Environ Med. 2022 Jan 1;64(1):e1-e7
pubmed: 34654039
J Occup Environ Med. 2020 Jul;62(7):503-510
pubmed: 32730026
Eur J Neurol. 2005 Jun;12 Suppl 1:1-27
pubmed: 15877774
Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2020 Jan 29;29:e96
pubmed: 31992379
BMC Psychiatry. 2019 Jan 24;19(1):40
pubmed: 30678679
J Occup Health Psychol. 2017 Jul;22(3):394-406
pubmed: 27732006
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Mar 14;17(6):
pubmed: 32183392
J Affect Disord. 2013 Sep 5;150(2):320-9
pubmed: 23706876
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Aug 19;16(16):
pubmed: 31430939
BMJ. 2021 Sep 30;374:n2061
pubmed: 34593508
Med J Aust. 1997 Feb 17;166(4):182-6
pubmed: 9066546
Ann Work Expo Health. 2018 Sep 13;62(suppl_1):S42-S54
pubmed: 30212884
Eur J Heart Fail. 2020 Nov;22(11):2007-2017
pubmed: 32468714
BMJ Glob Health. 2018 Jan 3;3(1):e000617
pubmed: 29515919
J Occup Environ Med. 2014 Jun;56(6):579-87
pubmed: 24905421
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Oct 31;17(21):
pubmed: 33142745
J Affect Disord. 2013 Dec;151(3):821-30
pubmed: 24091302
BMC Psychiatry. 2014 May 09;14:131
pubmed: 24884425