OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of a preventive coaching intervention on sickness absence due to psychosocial health complaints and on general well being of employees. METHODS:Employees at risk for sickness absence were identified and randomized. The intervention group received the preventive coaching program; the control group received usual care. Primary outcome measure of the trial is sickness absence due to psychosocial health complaints; secondary outcome measures are related to general well being, such as psychological distress, fatigue, and coping. RESULTS: No effect of coaching on self-reported sickness absence due to psychosocial health complaints was found. The intervention group reported statistically significant improved health, declined psychological distress, less burnout, less need for recovery, and an increased satisfaction with life. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that the coaching intervention primarily has an effect on general well being of employees.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of a preventive coaching intervention on sickness absence due to psychosocial health complaints and on general well being of employees. METHODS: Employees at risk for sickness absence were identified and randomized. The intervention group received the preventive coaching program; the control group received usual care. Primary outcome measure of the trial is sickness absence due to psychosocial health complaints; secondary outcome measures are related to general well being, such as psychological distress, fatigue, and coping. RESULTS: No effect of coaching on self-reported sickness absence due to psychosocial health complaints was found. The intervention group reported statistically significant improved health, declined psychological distress, less burnout, less need for recovery, and an increased satisfaction with life. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that the coaching intervention primarily has an effect on general well being of employees.
Authors: Sophie H Klasen; Ludovic Gpm van Amelsvoort; Nicole Wh Jansen; Jos Jm Slangen; Gladys Tjin A Ton; IJmert Kant Journal: Scand J Work Environ Health Date: 2021-01-07 Impact factor: 5.024
Authors: Suzanne Gm van Hees; Bouwine E Carlier; Emma Vossen; Roland Wb Blonk; Shirley Oomens Journal: Scand J Work Environ Health Date: 2021-12-08 Impact factor: 5.492
Authors: Corné A M Roelen; Ute Bültmann; Willem van Rhenen; Jac J L van der Klink; Jos W R Twisk; Martijn W Heymans Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-02-05 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Sara J Sagui-Henson; Maximo R Prescott; Julia B Corcoran; Sanil Pillai; Lindsey Mattila; Somya Mathur; Terry Adkins; Myra Altman Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2021-06-30 Impact factor: 5.033
Authors: Annette Notenbomer; Corné Roelen; Johan Groothoff; Willem van Rhenen; Ute Bültmann Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2018-10-23 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Lucia Tarro; Elisabet Llauradó; Gemma Ulldemolins; Pedro Hermoso; Rosa Solà Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-03-14 Impact factor: 3.390