nach oben

International Journal of Behavioral Medicine

Erschienen in:

23.05.2017

Quantifying Multiple Work-Related Psychosocial Risk Factors: Proposal for a Composite Indicator Based on the COPSOQ II

verfasst von: Adrienne Stauder, Katalin Nistor, Tünde Zakor, Anita Szabó, Anikó Nistor, Szilvia Ádám, Barna Konkolÿ Thege

Erschienen in: International Journal of Behavioral Medicine | Ausgabe 6/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To determine national reference values for the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ II) across occupational sectors and develop a composite score to estimate the cumulative effect of multiple work-related stressors, in order to facilitate the implementation of occupational health directives on psychosocial risk assessment.

Method

Cross-sectional data was collected via an online questionnaire. The sample included 13,104 individuals and was representative of the general Hungarian adult working population in terms of gender, age, education, and occupation. Mean scores were calculated for 18 scales on work environment and for 5 outcome scales of the COPSOQ II across 18 occupational sectors. We analyzed the association between a composite psychosocial risk score (CPRS), reflecting severity of exposure to multiple risk factors, and high stress, burnout, sleep troubles, and poor self-rated health.

Results

We found occupation-related differences in the mean scores on all COPSOQ II scales. Scores on the “Stress” scale ranged from 47.9 to 56.2, with the highest mean score in accommodation and food services sector. Variability was greatest with respect to emotional demands (range 40.3–67.6) and smallest with respect to role clarity (range 70.3–75.7). The prevalence of negative health outcomes increased with the CPRS. Five risk categories were formed, for which the odds ratio of negative outcomes ranged from 1.6 to 56.5.

Conclusion

The sector-specific psychosocial risk profiles covering 18 work environmental factors can be used as a reference in organizational surveys and international comparisons. The CPRS proved to be a powerful predictor of self-reported negative health outcomes.

Levi L. Guidance on work-related stress: spice of life or kiss of death? Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; 2000.

André MH TS, Clauwaert S, Gauthy R, Schömann I. Framework agreement on work related stress. An ETUC interpretation guide. ETUC Brussels. 2005. https://www.etuc.org/IMG/pdf/Brochure_stress_EN-3.pdf. Accessed 11 Nov 2015.

European Social Partners (ETUC B, UEAPME and CEEP). Implementation of the European Autonomous Framework Agreement on Work-related Stress. Report adopted by the European Social Partners—adopted at the Social Dialogue Committee on 18 June 2008. European Social Partners, Brussels. 2008. http://resourcecentre.etuc.org/linked_files/documents/DSstress%20Final_ImplemReport-EN.pdf. Accessed 11 Nov 2015.

Leka S, Jain A, Cox T, Kortum E. The development of the European framework for psychosocial risk management: PRIMA-EF. J Occup Health. 2011;53(2):137–43.CrossRefPubMed

Lippel K, Quinlan M. Regulation of psychosocial risk factors at work: an international overview. Saf Sci. 2011;49(4):543–6.CrossRef

Kristensen TS, Hannerz H, Hogh A, Borg V. The Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire—a tool for the assessment and improvement of the psychosocial work environment. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2005;31(6):438–49.CrossRefPubMed

Karasek R, Brisson C, Kawakami N, Houtman I, Bongers P, Amick B. The job content questionnaire (JCQ): an instrument for internationally comparative assessments of psychosocial job characteristics. J Occup Health Psychol. 1998;3(4):322–55.CrossRefPubMed

Siegrist J, Starke D, Chandola T, Godin I, Marmot M, Niedhammer I, et al. The measurement of effort-reward imbalance at work: European comparisons. Soc Sci Med. 2004;58(8):1483–99. doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(03)00351-4.CrossRefPubMed

Siegrist J, Wege N, Puhlhofer F, Wahrendorf M. A short generic measure of work stress in the era of globalization: effort-reward imbalance. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2008; doi:10.1007/s00420-008-0384-3.

10.

Nübling M, Burr H, Moncada S, Kristensen TS, editors. COPSOQ International Network: co-operation for research and assessment of psychosocial factors at work. Public Health Forum; 2014: Elsevier.

11.

Pejtersen JH, Kristensen TS, Borg V, Bjorner JB. The second version of the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire. Scand J Public Health. 2010;38(3 Suppl):8–24. doi:10.1177/1403494809349858.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Thorsen SV, Bjorner JB. Reliability of the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire. Scand J Public Health. 2010;38(3 Suppl):25–32. doi:10.1177/1403494809349859.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Nubling M, Stossel U, Hasselhorn HM, Michaelis M, Hofmann F. Measuring psychological stress and strain at work—evaluation of the COPSOQ questionnaire in Germany. Psychosoc Med. 2006;3:Doc05.

14.

Nübling M, Hasselhorn H. The Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire in Germany: from the validation of the instrument to the formation of a job-specific database of psychosocial factors at work. Scand J Public Health. 2010;38(3 Suppl):120–4. doi:10.1177/1403494809353652.CrossRef

15.

Moncada S, Utzet M, Molinero E, Llorens C, Moreno N, Galtes A, et al. The Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire II (COPSOQ II) in Spain—a tool for psychosocial risk assessment at the workplace. Am J Ind Med. 2014;57(1):97–107. doi:10.1002/ajim.22238.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Burr H, Albertsen K, Rugulies R, Hannerz H. Do dimensions from the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire predict vitality and mental health over and above the job strain and effort-reward imbalance models? Scand J Public Health. 2010;38(3 Suppl):59–68. doi:10.1177/1403494809353436.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Clausen T, Andersen LL, Holtermann A, Jorgensen AF, Aust B, Rugulies R. Do self-reported psychosocial working conditions predict low back pain after adjustment for both physical work load and depressive symptoms? A prospective study among female eldercare workers. Occup Environ Med. 2013;70(8):538–44. doi:10.1136/oemed-2012-101281.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Rugulies R, Aust B, Pejtersen JH. Do psychosocial work environment factors measured with scales from the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire predict register-based sickness absence of 3 weeks or more in Denmark? Scand J Public Health. 2010;38(3 Suppl):42–50. doi:10.1177/1403494809346873.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Rugulies R, Christensen KB, Borritz M, Villadsen E, Bültmann U, Kristensen TS. The contribution of the psychosocial work environment to sickness absence in human service workers: results of a 3-year follow-up study. Work & Stress. 2007;21(4):293–311.CrossRef

20.

Aust B, Rugulies R, Finken A, Jensen C. When workplace interventions lead to negative effects: learning from failures. Scand J Public Health. 2010;38(3 Suppl):106–19. doi:10.1177/1403494809354362.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Andreassen CN, Eriksen JG. The psychosocial work environment among physicians employed at Danish oncology departments in 2009. A nationwide cross-sectional study. Acta Oncol. 2013;52(1):138–46.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Pejtersen JH, Bjorner JB, Hasle P. Determining minimally important score differences in scales of the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire. Scand J Public Health. 2010;38(3 Suppl):33–41. doi:10.1177/1403494809347024.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Utzet M, Moncada S, Molinero E, Llorens C, Moreno N, Navarro A. The changing patterns of psychosocial exposures at work in the south of Europe: Spain as a labor market laboratory. Am J Ind Med. 2014;57(9):1032–42. doi:10.1002/ajim.22334.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Pejtersen JH, Kristensen TS. The development of the psychosocial work environment in Denmark from 1997 to 2005. Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health. 2009:284–93.

25.

Moncada S, Pejtersen JH, Navarro A, Llorens C, Burr H, Hasle P, et al. Psychosocial work environment and its association with socioeconomic status. A comparison of Spain and Denmark. Scand J Public Health. 2010;38(3 Suppl):137–48. doi:10.1177/1403494809353825.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Kristensen TS. A questionnaire is more than a questionnaire. Scand J Public Health. 2010;38(3 Suppl):149–55. doi:10.1177/1403494809354437.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Nübling M, Seidler A, Garthus-Niegel S, Latza U, Wagner M, Hegewald J, et al. The Gutenberg health study: measuring psychosocial factors at work and predicting health and work-related outcomes with the ERI and the COPSOQ questionnaire. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(1):538. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-538.CrossRef

28.

Hungarian Central Statistical Office: TEÁOR’08 methodological guideline. (Központi Statisztikai Hivatal: TEÁOR’08 módszertani útmutató, 2008.). 2008. https://www.ksh.hu/docs/files/532985.PDF. Accessed 11 Nov 2015.

29.

Nistor K, Ádám S, Cserháti Z, Szabó A, Zakor T, Stauder A. Psychometric characteristics of the Hungarian version of the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire II (COPSOQ II) (in Hungarian; a Koppenhágai Kérdőív a Munkahelyi Pszichoszociális Tényezőkről II (COPSOQ II) magyar verziójának pszichometriai jellemzői). Mentálhigiéné és Pszichoszomatika. 2015;16(2):179–207.CrossRef

30.

Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46(12):1417–32.CrossRefPubMed

31.

du Prel J-B, Peter R. Work-family conflict as a mediator in the association between work stress and depressive symptoms: cross-sectional evidence from the German lidA-cohort study. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2014;88(3):359–68.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Safety and health topics: workplace violence. United States Department Of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/workplaceviolence/. Accessed 7 Feb 2017.

33.

Deming WE, Stephan FF. On a least squares adjustment of a sampled frequency table when the expected marginal totals are known. 1940:427–44. doi:10.1214/aoms/1177731829.

34.

Moncada Lluís S, Llorens Serrano C, Font Corominas A, Galtés Camps A, Navarro GA. Exposición a riesgos psicosociales entre la población asalariada en España (2004-05): valores de referencia de las 21 dimensiones del cuestionario COPSOQ ISTAS21. Revista española de salud pública. 2008;82(6):667–75.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Yeh Y-C, Lin BY-J, Lin W-H, Wan TT. Job stress: its relationship to hospital pharmacists’ insomnia and work outcomes. International journal of behavioral medicine. 2010;17(2):143–53.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Freimann T, Merisalu E. Work-related psychosocial risk factors and mental health problems amongst nurses at a university hospital in Estonia: a cross-sectional study. Scandinavian journal of public health. 2015:1403494815579477.

37.

Dupret E, Bocerean C, Teherani M, Feltrin M, Pejtersen JH. Psychosocial risk assessment: French validation of the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire (COPSOQ). Scand J Public Health. 2012;40(5):482–90. doi:10.1177/1403494812453888.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Karasek R, Theorell T. Healthy work: stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. New York: Basic books; 1990.

39.

Schilling EA, Aseltine RH, Gore S. The impact of cumulative childhood adversity on young adult mental health: measures, models, and interpretations. Soc Sci Med. 2008;66(5):1140–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Stratton I, Cull C, Adler A, Matthews D, Neil H, Holman R. Additive effects of glycaemia and blood pressure exposure on risk of complications in type 2 diabetes: a prospective observational study (UKPDS 75). Diabetologia. 2006;49(8):1761–9.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Eurofound-EU-OSHA. Psychosocial risks in Europe: prevalence and strategies for prevention. Office of the European Union, Luxemburg. 2014. http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/sites/default/files/ef_publication/field_ef_document/ef1443en_0.pdf Accessed 09 Jan 2017.

42.

Wijndaele K, Matton L, Duvigneaud N, Lefevre J, Duquet W, Thomis M, et al. Reliability, equivalence and respondent preference of computerized versus paper-and-pencil mental health questionnaires. Comput Hum Behav. 2007;23(4):1958–70.CrossRef

43.

Eurostat. Individuals regularly using the internet. 2017. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tin00091. Accessed 7 Feb 2017.

Titel: Quantifying Multiple Work-Related Psychosocial Risk Factors: Proposal for a Composite Indicator Based on the COPSOQ II
verfasst von: Adrienne Stauder
Katalin Nistor
Tünde Zakor
Anita Szabó
Anikó Nistor
Szilvia Ádám
Barna Konkolÿ Thege
Publikationsdatum: 23.05.2017
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: International Journal of Behavioral Medicine / Ausgabe 6/2017
Print ISSN: 1070-5503
Elektronische ISSN: 1532-7558
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-017-9651-6

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Method

Results

Conclusion

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

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2017

Correction to: Psychosocial and Clinical Correlates of Fatigue in Haemodialysis Patients: the Importance of Patients’ Illness Cognitions and Behaviours

‘If You Choose to Abort, You Have Acted As an Instrument of Satan’: Zimbabwean Health Service Providers’ Negative Constructions of Women Presenting for Post Abortion Care

Fasting Glucose and the Risk of Depressive Symptoms: Instrumental-Variable Regression in the Cardiovascular Risk in Young Finns Study

Factors Associated with Poor Sleep in Older Adults with Multiple Sclerosis

The Impact of Militarism, Patriarchy, and Culture on Israeli Women’s Reproductive Health and Well-Being

A Daily Diary Approach to the Examination of Chronic Stress, Daily Hassles and Safety Perceptions in Hospital Nursing