nach oben

International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health

Erschienen in:

30.11.2017 | Original Article

Acceptance and barriers to access of occupational e-mental health: cross-sectional findings from a health-risk population of employees

verfasst von: Severin Hennemann, Michael Witthöft, Matthias Bethge, Katja Spanier, Manfred E. Beutel, Rüdiger Zwerenz

Erschienen in: International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health | Ausgabe 3/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

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.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Andersson G, Carlbring P, Ljótsson B, Hedman E (2013) Guided internet-based CBT for common mental disorders. J Contemp Psychother 43(4):223–233CrossRef

Apfel T, Riecher-Rössler A (2005) Do psychiatric patients receive disability pension before adequate diagnostics and treatment? Evaluation of 101 psychiatric expertises done on behalf of the Swiss invalidity insurance at the psychiatric outpatient department basel in 2002. Psychiatr Prax 32(04):172–176CrossRef

Barak A, Hen L, Boniel-Nissim M, Shapira N (2008) A Comprehensive review and a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of internet-based psychotherapeutic interventions. J Technol Hum Ser 26(2–4):109–160CrossRef

Baumeister H, Nowoczin L, Lin J, Seifferth H, Seufert J, Laubner K, Ebert DD (2014) Impact of an acceptance facilitating intervention on diabetes patients’ acceptance of Internet-based interventions for depression: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 105(1):30–39CrossRef

Baumeister H, Seifferth H, Lin J, Nowoczin L, Lüking M, Ebert D (2015) Impact of an acceptance facilitating intervention on patients’ acceptance of internet-based pain interventions: a randomized controlled trial. Clin J Pain 31(6):528–535CrossRef

Bernnat R, Bauer M, Schmidth H, Bieber N, Heusser N, Schönfeld R (2017) Effizienzpotenziale durch eHealth: Studie im Auftrag des Bundesverbands Gesundheits-IT—bvitg. e.V. und der CompuGroup Medical SE. https://www.strategyand.pwc.com/media/file/Effizienzpotentiale-durch-eHealth.pdf. Accessed 03 July 2017

Bethge M, Radoschewski FM (2010) Physical and psychosocial work stressors, health-related control beliefs and work ability: cross-sectional findings from the German Sociomedical Panel of Employees. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 83(3):241–250CrossRef

Bethge M, Radoschewski FM, Müller-Fahrnow W (2009) Work stress and work ability: cross-sectional findings from the German sociomedical panel of employees. Disabil Rehabil 31(20):1692–1699CrossRef

Bethge M, Spanier K, Peters E, Michel E, Radoschewski M (2017) Self-reported work ability predicts rehabilitation measures, disability pensions, other welfare benefits, and work participation: longitudinal findings from a sample of german employees. J Occup Rehabil. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-017-9733-y

Bhattacherjee A, Sanford C (2009) The intention–behaviour gap in technology usage: the moderating role of attitude strength. Behav Inf Technol 28(4):389–401CrossRef

Boonstra A, Broekhuis M (2010) Barriers to the acceptance of electronic medical records by physicians from systematic review to taxonomy and interventions. BMC Health Serv Res 10:231CrossRef

Constantino MJ, Arnkoff DB, Glass CR, Ametrano RM, Smith JZ (2011) Expectations. J Clin Psychol 67(2):184–192CrossRef

Corrigan P (2004) How stigma interferes with mental health care. Am Psychol 59(7):614CrossRef

Cuijpers P, Donker T, van Straten A, Li J, Andersson G (2010) Is guided self-help as effective as face-to-face psychotherapy for depression and anxiety disorders? A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative outcome studies. Psychol Med 40(12):1943–1957CrossRef

Deutsche Rentenversicherung (2017) Rehabilitation report. Update 2016. http://bit.ly/2vpmBOI. Accessed 04 July 2017

Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund (2014) Position paper of the German pension insurance fund on the significance of mental illness in rehabilitation and reduction in earning capacity. http://www.deutsche-rentenversicherung.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/339288/publicationFile/64601/pospap_psych_Erkrankung.pdf. Accessed 24 July 2017

Dockweiler C (2016) Acceptance of telemedicine. In: eHealth in Germany. Springer, Berlin, pp 257–271

Donovan CL, Poole C, Boyes N, Redgate J, March S (2015) Australian mental health worker attitudes towards cCBT: what is the role of knowledge? Are there differences? Can we change them? Internet Interv 2(4):372–381CrossRef

Ebert D, Tarnowski T, Gollwitzer M, Sieland B, Berking M (2013) A transdiagnostic internet-based maintenance treatment enhances the stability of outcome after inpatient cognitive behavioral therapy: a randomized controlled trial. Psychother Psychosom 82(4):246–256CrossRef

Ebert DD, Berking M, Cuijpers P, Lehr D, Pörtner M, Baumeister H (2015) Increasing the acceptance of internet-based mental health interventions in primary care patients with depressive symptoms. A randomized controlled trial. J Affect Disord 176:9–17CrossRef

Ebert DD, Heber E, Berking M, Riper H, Cuijpers P, Funk B, Lehr D (2016) Self-guided internet-based and mobile-based stress management for employees: results of a randomised controlled trial. Occup Environ Med 73(5):315–323CrossRef

Eichenberg C, Wolters C, Brähler E (2013) The Internet as a mental health advisor in Germany—results of a national survey. PLoS One 8(11):e79206CrossRef

Eisinga R, Grotenhuis M, Pelzer B (2013) The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or Spearman-Brown? Int J Public Health 58(4):637–642CrossRef

Frese M (1999) Social support as a moderator of the relationship between work stressors and psychological dysfunctioning: a longitudinal study with objective measures. J Occup Health Psychol 4(3):179–192CrossRef

Gauck J (2012) DIVSI milieu-study on trust and security in the Internet. https://www.divsi.de/publikationen/studien/divsi-milieu-studie-zu-vertrauen-und-sicherheit-im-internet-aktualisierung-2013/einfuhrung/. Accessed 11 July 17

Gjesdal S, Ringdal PR, Haug K, Mæland JG (2004) Predictors of disability pension in long-term sickness absence: results from a population-based and prospective study in Norway 1994–1999. Eur J Public Health 14(4):398–405CrossRef

Gun SY, Titov N, Andrews G (2011) Acceptability of Internet treatment of anxiety and depression. Australas Psychiatry 19(3):259–264CrossRef

Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel RM (1993) The rand 36-item health survey 1.0. Health Econ 2(3):217–227CrossRef

Heber E, Ebert DD, Lehr D, Cuijpers P, Berking M, Nobis S, Riper H (2017) The benefit of web- and computer-based interventions for stress: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res 19(2):e32CrossRef

Hedman E, Andersson E, Ljotsson B, Andersson G, Ruck C, Lindefors N (2011) Cost-effectiveness of Internet-based cognitive behavior therapy vs. cognitive behavioral group therapy for social anxiety disorder: results from a randomized controlled trial. Behav Res Ther 49(11):729–736CrossRef

Henderson M, Harvey SB, Øverland S, Mykletun A, Hotopf M (2011) Work and common psychiatric disorders. J R Soc Med 104(5):198–207CrossRef

Hennemann S, Beutel ME, Zwerenz R (2016) Drivers and barriers to acceptance of web-based aftercare of patients in inpatient routine care: a cross-sectional survey. J Med Internet Res 18(12):e337CrossRef

Hennemann S, Beutel ME, Zwerenz R (2017a) ‘Morbus Google’ vs. e-Health: a qualitative study of acceptance and implementation of online-aftercare in inpatient rehabilitation. Rehabilitation (Stuttg). http://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-102150

Hennemann S, Beutel ME, Zwerenz R (2017b) Ready for eHealth? Health professionals’ acceptance and adoption of ehealth interventions in inpatient routine care. J Health Commun 22(3):274–284CrossRef

Hu L, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6(1):1–55CrossRef

Internet Society (2016) Global Internet Report. http://bit.ly/2fQDYzm. Accessed 15 Feb 2017

Karpansalo M, Manninen P, Kauhanen J, Lakka TA, Salonen JT (2004) Perceived health as a predictor of early retirement. Scand J Work Environ Health 30(4):287–292

Klein JP, Gerlinger G, Knaevelsrud C, Bohus M, Meisenzahl E, Kersting A, Röhr S, Riedel-Heller SG, Sprick U, Dirmaier J (2016) Internet-based interventions in the treatment of mental disorders. Overview, quality criteria perspectives. Der Nervenarzt 87(11):1185–1193CrossRef

Koch W, Frees B (2016) Results of the ARD/ZDF online study 2016: Dynamic developement in mobile Internet use and in audio/video. Media Perspektiven 9(2016):418–437

Kontos E, Blake DK, Chou SW, Prestin A (2014) Predictors of eHealth usage: insights on the digital divide from the health information national trends survey 2012. J Med Internet Res 16(7):e172CrossRef

Lehr D, Geraedts A, Asplund RP, Khadjesari Z, Heber E, Bloom J de, Ebert DD, Angerer P, Funk B (2016a) Occupational e-mental health: current approaches and promising perspectives for promoting mental health in workers. Healthy at work. Springer, Berlin, pp 257–281

Lehr D, Heber E, Sieland B, Hillert A, Funk B, Ebert DD (2016b) Occupational eMental Health and teachers’ health: a meta-analytic review on the efficacy of internet-based intervention for promoting mental health in teachers. Prävention Gesundheitsförderung 11(3):182–192CrossRef

Li J, Talaei-Khoei A, Seale H, Ray P, MacIntyre CR (2013) Health care provider adoption of eHealth: systematic literature review. Interact J Med Res 2(1):e7CrossRef

Liu L, Miguel Cruz A, Rios Rincon A, Buttar V, Ranson Q, Goertzen D (2015) What factors determine therapists’ acceptance of new technologies for rehabilitation—a study using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT). Disabil Rehabil 37(5):447–455CrossRef

Menachemi N, Brooks RG (2006) EHR and other IT adoption among physicians: results of a large-scale statewide analysis. J Healthc Inf Manag 20(3):79–87

Menachemi N, Langley A, Brooks RG (2007) The use of information technologies among rural and urban physicians in Florida. J Med Syst 31(6):483–488CrossRef

Morfeld M, Kirchberger I, Bullinger M (2011) SF-36 Questionnaire. German version of the Short Form-36 Health Survey. Hogrefe, Göttingen

Mykletun A, Overland S, Dahl AA, Krokstad S, Bjerkeset O, Glozier N, Aarø LE, Prince M (2006) A population-based cohort study of the effect of common mental disorders on disability pension awards. Am J Psychiatry 163(8):1412–1418CrossRef

Neter E, Brainin E (2012) eHealth literacy: extending the digital divide to the realm of health information. J Med Internet Res 14(1):e19CrossRef

Nordgren LB, Hedman E, Etienne J, Bodin J, Kadowaki Å, Eriksson S, Lindkvist E, Andersson G, Carlbring P (2014) Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of individually tailored Internet-delivered cognitive behavior therapy for anxiety disorders in a primary care population: a randomized controlled trial. Behav Res Ther 59:1–11CrossRef

Norman CD, Skinner AH (2006) eHealth literacy: essential skills for consumer health in a networked world. J Med Internet Res 8(2):e9CrossRef

Petermann F, Koch U (2009) Psychosomatic rehabilitation: Quo Vadis? Rehabilitation (Stuttg) 48(05):257–262CrossRef

Schröder J, Sautier L, Kriston L, Berger T, Meyer B, Späth C, Köther U, Nestoriuc Y, Klein JP, Moritz S (2015) Development of a questionnaire measuring Attitudes towards Psychological Online Interventions—the APOI. J Affect Disord 187:136–141CrossRef

Schwarzer R (2008) Modeling health behavior change: How to predict and modify the adoption and maintenance of health behaviors. Appl Psychol 57(1):1–29CrossRef

Soellner R, Huber S, Reder M (2014) The concept of eHealth literacy and its measurement: German translation of the eHEALS. J Media Psychol 26(1):29–38CrossRef

Stansfeld S, Candy B (2006) Psychosocial work environment and mental health—a meta-analytic review. Scand J Work Environ Health 32(6):443–462CrossRef

Taiwo AA, Downe AG (2013) The theory of user acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): a meta-analytic review of empirical findings. J Theor Appl Inf Technol 49(1):48–58

Thiart H, Lehr D, Ebert DD, Berking M, Riper H (2015) Log in and breathe out: internet-based recovery training for sleepless employees with work-related strain—results of a randomized controlled trial. Scand J Work Environ Health 41(2):164–174CrossRef

Topooco N, Riper H, Araya R, Berking M, Brunn M, Chevreul K, Cieslak R, Ebert DD, Etchmendy E, Herrero R, Kleiboer A, Krieger T, García-Palacios A, Cerga-Pashoja A, Smoktunowicz E, Urech A, Vis C, Andersson G (2017) Attitudes towards digital treatment for depression: a European stakeholder survey. Internet Interv 08:1–9CrossRef

Tuomi K, Huuhtanen P, Nykyri E, Ilmarinen J (2001) Promotion of work ability, the quality of work and retirement. Occup Med (Lond) 51(5):318–324CrossRef

Venkatesh V, Davis FD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manage Sci 46(2):186–204CrossRef

Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q 27(3):425–478CrossRef

Wallin EEK, Mattsson S, Olsson EMG, Eysenbach G (2016) the preference for internet-based psychological interventions by individuals without past or current use of mental health treatment delivered online: a survey study with mixed-methods analysis. JMIR Mental Health 3(2):e25CrossRef

Wang PS, Lane M, Olfson M, Pincus HA, Wells KB, Kessler RC (2005) Twelve-month use of mental health services in the united states: results from the national comorbidity survey replication. Arch Gen Psychiatry 62(6):629–640CrossRef

WHO (1998) A health telematics policy: report of WHO group consultation on health telematics. WHO, Geneva

Yardley L, Morrison L, Bradbury K, Muller I (2015) The person-based approach to intervention development: application to digital health-related behavior change interventions. J Med Internet Res 17(1):e30CrossRef

Yuan K, Bentler PM (2000) Three likelihood-based methods for mean and covariance structure analysis with nonnormal missing data. Soc Methodol 30(1):165–200CrossRef

Zwerenz R, Knickenberg RJ, Schattenburg L, Beutel ME (2004) Work-related stress and resources of psychosomatic patients compared to the general population. Rehabilitation (Stuttg) 43(1):10–16CrossRef

Zwerenz R, Becker J, Gerzymisch K, Siepmann M, Holme M, Kiwus U, Spörl-Dönch S, Beutel ME (2017) Evaluation of a transdiagnostic psychodynamic online intervention to support return to work: a randomized controlled trial. PLoS One 12(5):e0176513CrossRef

Titel: Acceptance and barriers to access of occupational e-mental health: cross-sectional findings from a health-risk population of employees
verfasst von: Severin Hennemann
Michael Witthöft
Matthias Bethge
Katja Spanier
Manfred E. Beutel
Rüdiger Zwerenz
Publikationsdatum: 30.11.2017
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health / Ausgabe 3/2018
Print ISSN: 0340-0131
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1246
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-017-1280-5

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2018

Pulmonary function and high-resolution computed tomography examinations among offshore drill floor workers

Ocular surface and tear film status among contact lens wearers and non-wearers who use VDT at work: comparing three different lens types

Working hours and depressive symptoms over 7 years: evidence from a Korean panel study

Different autonomic responses to occupational and leisure time physical activities among blue-collar workers

Risk factors for episodic neck pain in workers: a 5-year prospective study of a general working population

Environmental and biological measurements of isoflurane and sevoflurane in operating room personnel