4.6 Review

The psychosocial and health effects of workplace reorganisation. 1. A systematic review of organisational-level interventions that aim to increase employee control

期刊

JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY AND COMMUNITY HEALTH
卷 61, 期 11, 页码 945-954

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/jech.2006.054965

关键词

-

资金

  1. Chief Scientist Office [SPHSU1] Funding Source: researchfish
  2. Medical Research Council [MC_U130059812] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. MRC [MC_U130059812] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Systematic review of the health and psychosocial effects of increasing employee participation and control through workplace reorganisation, with reference to the demand control -support'' model of workplace health. Design: Systematic review (QUORUM) of experimental and quasi-experimental studies (any language) reporting health and psychosocial effects of such interventions. Data sources: Electronic databases (medical, social science and economic), bibliographies and expert contacts. Results: We identified 18 studies, 12 with control/ comparison groups (no randomised controlled trials). Eight controlled and three uncontrolled studies found some evidence of health benefits (especially beneficial effects on mental health, including reduction in anxiety and depression) when employee control improved or (less consistently) demands decreased or support increased. Some effects may have been short term or influenced by concurrent interventions. Two studies of participatory interventions occurring alongside redundancies reported worsening employee health. Conclusions: This systematic review identified evidence suggesting that some organisational-level participation interventions may benefit employee health, as predicted by the demand-control-support model, but may not protect employees from generally poor working conditions. More investigation of the relative impacts of different interventions, implementation and the distribution of effects across the socioeconomic spectrum is required.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据