4.5 Article

Development of guidelines to assist organisations to support employees returning to work after an episode of anxiety, depression or a related disorder: a Delphi consensus study with Australian professionals and consumers

Journal

BMC PSYCHIATRY
Volume 12, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-244X-12-135

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. beyondblue under the Victorian Centre of Excellence in Depression and Related Disorders
  2. NHMRC Australia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Mental disorders are a significant cause of disability and loss of workplace productivity. The scientific evidence for how organisations should best support those returning to work after common mental disorders is relatively limited. Therefore a Delphi expert consensus study was carried out with professional and consumer experts. Methods: A systematic review of websites, books and journal articles was conducted to develop a 387 item survey containing strategies that organisations might use to support those returning to work after common mental disorders. Three panels of Australian experts (66 health professionals, 30 employers and 80 consumers) were recruited and independently rated the items over three rounds, with strategies reaching consensus on importance written into the guidelines. Results: The participation rate across all three rounds was 60.2% (57.6% health professionals, 76.7% employers, 56.3% consumers). 308 strategies were endorsed as essential or important by at least 80% of all three panels. The endorsed strategies provided information on policy and procedures, the roles of supervisors, employees and colleagues in managing absence and return to work, and provision of mental health information and training. Conclusions: The guidelines outline strategies for organisations supporting those returning to work after common mental disorders. It is hoped that they may be used to inform policy and practice in a variety of workplaces.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available