Effects of a stress management intervention on absenteeism and return to work – results from a randomized wait-list controlled trial

• Main Authors: Morten Vejs Willert, Ane Marie Thulstrup, Jens Peter Bonde
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Nordic Association of Occupational Safety and Health (NOROSH) 2011-05-01
• Series: Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health
• Subjects: rtw; sick leave; absenteeism; return to work; randomized controlled trial; job; occupational medicine; stress management intervention; wait-list controlled trial
• Online Access: https://www.sjweh.fi/show_abstract.php?abstract_id=3130

OBJECTIVES: High levels of work-related stress are associated with increased absenteeism from work and reduced work ability. In this study, we investigated the effects of a stress management intervention on absenteeism and return to work. METHODS: We randomized 102 participants into either the intervention or wait-list control (WLC) group. The intervention group received the intervention in weeks 1–16 from baseline, and the WLC group received the intervention in weeks 17–32. Self-reported data on absenteeism (number of days full- or part-time absent from work within the previous three months) were obtained at 16, 32, and 48 weeks follow-up. Register-based data on long-term absence from work were drawn from the Danish public transfer payments (DREAM) database from baseline and 48 weeks onwards. The DREAM database contains weekly information on long-term sickness absence compensation. The threshold to enter DREAM is sick leave for two consecutive weeks. RESULTS: At follow-up in week 16, self-reported absenteeism in the intervention group [median 11 days (range 3–25)] was lower (P=0.02) than in the WLC group [median 45 days (range 19–60)], corresponding to a 29% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 5–52] reduction. On register-based data (cumulated weeks in DREAM, weeks 1–16), the intervention group median [6 weeks (range 0–11)] was lower than that of the WLC group [median 12 weeks (range 8–16)], though not significantly (P=0.06), corresponding to a 21% (95% CI 0–42) reduction. For return to work, a hazard ratio of 1.58 (95% CI 0.89–2.81) favoring the intervention group was found (P=0.12). CONCLUSIONS: The intervention reduces self-reported absenteeism from work. A similar trend was found from register-based records. No conclusive evidence was found for return to work.