Introduction
Subjective health complaints (SHC) are general health problems with a high prevalence, affecting more than 90 % of the general population in Norway [
1,
2]. SHC refers to somatic and psychological complaints without objective pathological signs or symptoms, or where the pathological findings are disproportionate to the illness experience [
3]. Anxiety and depression are common psychological complaints, affecting 20–25 % of the adult population (see e.g.
4,
5).
Anxiety and depression has emerged as a major public and occupational health problem in many countries [
6]. Depression and mild anxiety disorders are the most common mental disorders among employees, with a prevalence of between 6 and 10 % on a subclinical level (see e.g.
6,
7). As with other mental disorders, the core symptoms of anxiety and depression affect a person’s emotional, cognitive and social functioning, which can have impact on working ability [
8]. Studies based on records of sick leave certificates indicate that employees diagnosed with anxiety or depression often show a pattern with long duration and frequent recurrence of sick leave [
9], and multiple episodes of sick leave is a risk factor for permanent exclusion from working life [
10]. People who are employed have significantly better health compared with those who are outside the labour market [
11], and being on disability benefits is a risk factor for early death [
12]. The increase in sick leave and work disability because of anxiety and depression has serious negative health and economical consequences and thus calling for preventive strategies [
13].
As the activity occupying most people’s waking time is work, the work environment is an important arena for influencing the health of employees. Unemployment is a more important determinant for poor mental health than work-related risks, but in those who are working, the perception of high demands, low control, and high strain, as proposed in the ‘job strain’ model [
14], and low work satisfaction are significantly associated with increased risk of anxiety and depression [
15,
16]. Coping is also an important factor influencing the mental health of employees, as prolonged stress activation as a result of lack of coping might lead to a feeling of helplessness and hopelessness, and both of these conditions are proposed as cognitive models of depression [
17,
18]. Coping increases resistance to development of mental disorders (see e.g.
19), and has been shown to be more important for health than control [
20].
Coping is defined and measured in many different ways. The ‘transactional model of stress and coping’, which focuses on coping strategies [
21], and self-efficacy, which focuses on the belief that a person can act in a way that leads to a particular goal [
22], are influential models. However, in this study, coping is defined and measured as a positive response outcome expectancy, based on the Cognitive Activation Theory of Stress (CATS) [
18]. CATS offer a psychobiological explanation for the presumed relationships between health and internal and external events. These events are referred to as “stress” [
18]. Whether an event is pleasant or threatening depends on a person’s appraisal of the situation, which again is based on previous experience and learning and expectations of one’s responses [
18]. Specific responses or coping strategies may alter the stress stimuli, and these effects will be stored as response outcome expectancies. CATS states that the strategy chosen does not predict a person’s internal state and thus it does not predict health effects [
18]. CATS argues that coping predicts relations to health and disease only when it is defined as positive response outcome expectancy, and that the most important aspect of coping for health outcomes is not how a person copes but rather if a person expects to cope at all [
18]. In CATS, response outcome expectancies may be positive (coping), negative (hopelessness), or the individual may have established no response outcome expectancy (helplessness). The ability to react to challenges and changes with a general alarm response is an essential element of our self-regulating system. The alarm response elicits a general increase in wakefulness and brain activation, and specific responses to manage the reason for the alarm [
18]. But, there is no linear relationship between the challenges or demands the individual is faced with, and the increase in activation. It is the individual’s experience of the demands and the expectancies of the response outcome that is important for the duration of the activation. A short-lasting activation has no proven ill effects, but may rather have a positive training effect [
18]. Long-lasting or sustained activation may however produce negative health effects, illness or disease [
18]. Individual differences in the expectancy and ability to cope with workplace and general life demands may thus be important for how the work conditions influence the health of the employees [
19,
20].
Somatic and mental complaints are frequently co-occurring. Unexplained or multiple somatic symptoms are strongly associated with coexisting depressive and anxiety disorders (see e.g.
23,
24), and the prevalence rates of mental disorders is found to increase with the growing number of somatic disorders [
25]. Anxiety and depression are also often co-occurring, and 85 % of adults with depression experience significant symptoms of anxiety, and 58 % have a diagnosable anxiety disorder during their lifetime [
26,
27]. However, it is important to remember that there are many similarities between anxiety and depression in terms of risk factors, symptoms, and genetic factors [
28]. In general, there is a strong association between number of symptoms and overall health and functional status, and the simple method of counting symptoms might be valuable in research on medically unexplained conditions [
29,
30].
The aim of this study was to explore the association between employees reporting anxiety and/or depression on the Subjective Health Complaint inventory (SHC), a inventory that records complaints, without asking for attributions or medical diagnosis [
31], and response outcome expectancies, work satisfaction, physical and mental work strain, and number of SHC. We hypothesize that response outcome expectancies is a stronger predictor for anxiety and depression than work satisfaction, physical and mental work strain and number of SHC.
Discussion
The aim of this study was to explore the association between anxiety and/or depression, and response outcome expectancies, work satisfaction, physical and mental work strain, and number of SHC in Norwegian municipal employees. The respondents in this sample reported on average a high degree of coping and a low degree of helplessness/hopelessness, which is to be expected in a healthy working population [
35]. We hypothesized that response outcome expectancies would be the strongest predictor. The strongest association was however found between a high number of SHC and substantial anxiety and depression. A high degree of helplessness/hopelessness was a significant factor in explaining substantial depression, but not substantial anxiety. Thus, it may be that the depression-item has a higher explanatory power to the effect of helplessness/hopelessness in the analyses including both anxiety and depression as the dependent variable. The model with the highest proportion of variance accounted for was the one using comorbid anxiety and depression as dependent variable. According to Nagelkerke “pseudo” R
2 the explained variance for this model was 41 %. For anxiety and depression alone the explained variance was lower, respectively 14 and 23 %.
Our findings are in accordance with a previous study that found a higher prevalence of SHC in groups that reported low coping in the normal working population, suggesting that lack of coping with stress, meaning low expectancies of a positive outcome, play an important role for normal SHC [
20]. It may not be possible to prevent the occurrence of SHC. These complaints seem to be inherent in human nature and a part of everyday life, regardless of society or modern civilization [
37]. However, it may be possible to influence employees’ response outcome expectancies, which in turn may influence the perception of health and further prevent negative consequences of such complaints [
32]. Inability to cope with health complaints, the stress of an adverse work environment, or general life demands, may aggravate and reinforce the perception of health complaints, which in turn may have an effect on sensitization processes [
38]. When complaints get intolerable we seek help and comfort, and this is the major reason for visiting the general practitioner [
39]. Few of these patients have any serious medical condition or pathological findings, and there is no specific treatment for most of them. Despite this fact, and because the complaints are still very troublesome, many keep asking for medical explanations and medical help. A constant pursuit of answers and treatment for these conditions may have an unfavorable effect on the individual, such as unnecessary worrying [
40]. Health worry has been found to predict the occurrence of health complaints [
41], and both rumination and worry are central factors in anxiety disorders and depression [
42]. A high frequency of visits to medical practitioners for symptoms that disrupt normal activities is also found to be a strong predictor for the development of medically unexplained physical symptoms [
43]. There is a high focus on treatment for SHC, and many possible different treatment options, but little information about the limited effect many of the treatments have on these conditions. The strain on health from treatments that does not work is an important aspect to consider.
In this present study no and negative response outcome expectancies are a stronger predictor for anxiety and depression than physical and mental work strain. These results can be explained within the framework of CATS [
18], where the expectancy of being able to cope with challenges or demands are more important for employees health than the physical demand itself. All stress stimuli are filtered before it gets access to the response system, and how a person reacts to the stimulus is determined by his or her experience of the demand and the expectancy of the outcome. If an employee expects to be able to handle a situation or demand with a positive result, the increase in activation is short and has a positive influence on health. If an employee expects not to cope with a situation or a demand, the activation may be sustained over time, which is associated with illness, disease, and poor health [
44]. Our results also indicate that a feeling of helplessness (no response outcome expectancy) and hopelessness (negative response outcome expectancy), which both are proposed models for anxiety and depression [
18,
45], are more important for employees’ mental health than work satisfaction.
Although the results were statistically significant, the effect sizes were relatively small. This may be a consequence of the large sample, as large samples make it more likely to achieve statistical significance even with small effect sizes. However, a large sample increases the likelihood that the results are in accordance with the actual population value, and even small effect sizes might have important practical significance [
46]. Anxiety and depression have a substantially higher explanatory power in functional status than other SHC [
29], and are among the most frequent causes of long-term sick leave and disability pensions in Norway [
47]. Because the economic impact of sick leave is large, even marginal reductions and improvements may induce considerable savings. As response outcome expectancies may be possible to alter, our results imply that influencing employees response outcome expectancies could be an important focus in future workplace interventions targeting anxiety and depression. Nevertheless, it is probably equally important to also focus on creating an including work culture at the workplace, where employees with complaints are regarded as a part of the normal work environment and not excluded because of their health challenges.
Strengths and Limitations
One of the main strengths of the study is that it is based on a large and representative sample of Norwegian municipality employees, which provides a good basis for generalization of the results to other worksites in the public sector. The sample is diverse with regard to work type and workplace size, which reduces the possibility of localization or group specific effects. However, we should be cautious about generalizing our finding to employees in the private sector.
A response rate of about 50 % may limit the validity of the findings. Even though considerable efforts were made to improve the response rate by providing information to the employees about the project, it remained low. The high predominance of women in the sample (81 %) is in accordance with the gender distribution of public sector employees, as about 70 % of all public sector employees are women, with the majority working in the municipalities [
48]. In the two participating municipalities, 79 % and 68 % of the employees are women.
There might be limitations with using single-item questions when measuring psychological constructs [
49] and the inclusion of validated scales on work satisfaction and work strain could provide more reliable conclusions regarding the relationship between anxiety, depression, and work characteristics. However, single-item questions measuring both work satisfaction [
49] and work strain [
50] indicates convergent validity with multi-item scales, which support the argument that a single-item question is acceptable. The anxiety- and depression items in SHC is found to be a good indicator in identifying anxiety and depression, when compared with widely used screening questionnaires [
34]. From an ethical point of view, using a single-item question, as opposed to a multi-item scale, decreases the burden on the study participants.