Severin Hennemann1, Michael Witthöft2, Matthias Bethge3, Katja Spanier3, Manfred E Beutel4, Rüdiger Zwerenz4. 1. Department of Clinical Psychology, Psychotherapy and Experimental Psychopathology, Institute of Psychology, University of Mainz, Wallstraße 3, 55122, Mainz, Germany. s.hennemann@uni-mainz.de. 2. Department of Clinical Psychology, Psychotherapy and Experimental Psychopathology, Institute of Psychology, University of Mainz, Wallstraße 3, 55122, Mainz, Germany. 3. Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Luebeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562, Lübeck, Germany. 4. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center, Gutenberg University Mainz, Untere Zahlbacher Str. 8, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Occupational e-mental-health (OEMH) may extend existing instruments for preservation or restoration of health and work ability. As a key precondition to efficient implementation, this study examined acceptance and person-centered barriers to potential uptake of OEMH for work-related distress in employees with an elevated risk of early retirement. METHODS: Within the framework of the "Third German Sociomedical Panel of Employees", 1829 employees with prior sickness absence payments filled out a self-administered questionnaire. Participants had a mean age of 49.93 years (SD = 4.06). 6.2% indicated prior use of eHealth interventions. Potential predictors of acceptance of OEMH were examined based on the "Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology" (UTAUT) extended by work ability, mental health, eHealth literacy and demographic characteristics. RESULTS: 89.1% (n = 1579) showed low to moderate acceptance (M = 2.20, SD = 1.05, range 1-5). A path analysis revealed significant, positive direct effects of UTAUT predictors on acceptance (performance expectancy: 0.48, SE = 0.02, p < 0.001; effort expectancy: 0.20, SE = 0.02, p < 0.001; social influence: 0.28, SE = 0.02, p < 0.001).Online time and frequency of online health information search were further positive direct predictors of acceptance. Model fit was good [χ 2(7) = 12.91, p = 0.07, RMSEA = 0.02, CFI = 1.00, TLI = 0.99, SRMR = 0.01]. CONCLUSIONS: Attitudes towards OEMH are rather disadvantageous in the studied risk group. Implementation of OEMH, therefore, requires a-priori education including promotion of awareness, favorable attitudes regarding efficacy and usability in a collaborative approach.
PURPOSE: Occupational e-mental-health (OEMH) may extend existing instruments for preservation or restoration of health and work ability. As a key precondition to efficient implementation, this study examined acceptance and person-centered barriers to potential uptake of OEMH for work-related distress in employees with an elevated risk of early retirement. METHODS: Within the framework of the "Third German Sociomedical Panel of Employees", 1829 employees with prior sickness absence payments filled out a self-administered questionnaire. Participants had a mean age of 49.93 years (SD = 4.06). 6.2% indicated prior use of eHealth interventions. Potential predictors of acceptance of OEMH were examined based on the "Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology" (UTAUT) extended by work ability, mental health, eHealth literacy and demographic characteristics. RESULTS: 89.1% (n = 1579) showed low to moderate acceptance (M = 2.20, SD = 1.05, range 1-5). A path analysis revealed significant, positive direct effects of UTAUT predictors on acceptance (performance expectancy: 0.48, SE = 0.02, p < 0.001; effort expectancy: 0.20, SE = 0.02, p < 0.001; social influence: 0.28, SE = 0.02, p < 0.001).Online time and frequency of online health information search were further positive direct predictors of acceptance. Model fit was good [χ 2(7) = 12.91, p = 0.07, RMSEA = 0.02, CFI = 1.00, TLI = 0.99, SRMR = 0.01]. CONCLUSIONS: Attitudes towards OEMH are rather disadvantageous in the studied risk group. Implementation of OEMH, therefore, requires a-priori education including promotion of awareness, favorable attitudes regarding efficacy and usability in a collaborative approach.
Authors: David Daniel Ebert; Elena Heber; Matthias Berking; Heleen Riper; Pim Cuijpers; Burkhardt Funk; Dirk Lehr Journal: Occup Environ Med Date: 2016-02-16 Impact factor: 4.402
Authors: Arnstein Mykletun; Simon Overland; Alv A Dahl; Steinar Krokstad; Ottar Bjerkeset; Nicholas Glozier; Leif E Aarø; Martin Prince Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Renaldo M Bernard; Claudia Toppo; Alberto Raggi; Marleen de Mul; Carlota de Miquel; Maria Teresa Pugliese; Christina M van der Feltz-Cornelis; Ana Ortiz-Tallo; Luis Salvador-Carulla; Sue Lukersmith; Leona Hakkaart-van Roijen; Dorota Merecz-Kot; Kaja Staszewska; Carla Sabariego Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 7.076
Authors: Jennifer Apolinário-Hagen; Severin Hennemann; Christina Kück; Alexandra Wodner; Dorota Geibel; Marlies Riebschläger; Martin Zeißler; Bernhard Breil Journal: Health Serv Insights Date: 2020-03-13
Authors: Rüdiger Zwerenz; Carlotta Baumgarten; Jan Becker; Ana Tibubos; Martin Siepmann; Rudolf J Knickenberg; Manfred E Beutel Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2019-10-24 Impact factor: 5.428