Invited commentary: job strain and health behaviors—developing a bigger picture

Investigation of the association between job stressors and health behaviors has a long history that has been marked by mixed findings. Fransson et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2012;176(12):1078–1089) find robust prospective and cross-sectional associations between job strain and leisure-time physical inactivity in combined data from 14 cohort studies. Further research to better understand the observed heterogeneity in the contributing cohorts and other studies will be crucial for application to intervention design and tailoring. The population health significance of these findings requires consideration of other job strain–health behavior (particularly the parallel analyses conducted for body mass index and smoking in the same data set) and job strain–health outcome associations, as well as these same associations for other job stressors. Job strain can be seen as a “fundamental cause” of work-related disease, in that intervention to reduce exposure to job strain could have beneficial impacts on many outcomes, making a compelling case for intervention. The significantly strengthened evidence linking job stressors to health behaviors provided by Fransson et al. may help to further direct workplace health promotion research, policy, and practice towards an approach that better integrates intervention on working conditions and health behaviors. The benefits to population health could be substantial.

Job stress as a preventable upstream determinant of common mental disorders: a review for practitioners and policy-makers

There is growing recognition of the important role of mental health in the workforce and in the workplace. At the same time, there has been a rapid growth of studies linking job stress and other psychosocial working conditions to common mental disorders, and a corresponding increase in public concern media attention to job stress and its impact upon worker health and well-being. This article provides a summary of the relevant scientific and medical literature on this topic for practitioners and policy-makers. It presents a primer on job stress concepts, an overview of the evidence linking job stress and common mental disorders, a summary of the intervention research on ways to prevent and control job stress, and a discussion of the strengths and weakness of the evidence base. We conclude that there is strong evidence linking job stress and common mental disorders, and that it is a substantial problem on the population level. On a positive note, however, the job stress intervention evidence also shows that the problem is preventable and can be effectively addressed by a combination of work- and worker-directed intervention.

Does workplace social capital buffer the effects of job stress? A cross-sectional, multilevel analysis of cigarette smoking among U.S. manufacturing workers

Objective: To investigate whether workplace social capital buffers the association between job stress and smoking status. Methods: As part of the Harvard Cancer Prevention Project's Healthy Directions—Small Business Study, interviewer-administered questionnaires were completed by 1740 workers and 288 managers in 26 manufacturing firms (84% and 85% response). Social capital was assessed by multiple items measured at the individual level among workers and contextual level among managers. Job stress was operationalized by the demand-control model. Multilevel logistic regression was used to estimate associations between job stressors and smoking and test for effect modification by social capital measures. Results: Workplace social capital (both summary measures) buffered associations between high job demands and smoking. One compositional item—worker trust in managers—buffered associations between job strain and smoking. Conclusion: Workplace social capital may modify the effects of psychosocial working conditions on health behaviors.

Job strain exposures vs. stress-related workers’ compensation claims in Victoria, Australia: developing a public health response to job stress

We present a comparative analysis of patterns of exposure to job stressors and stress-related workers’ compensation (WC) claims to provide an evaluation of the adequacy of claims-driven policy and practice. We assessed job strain prevalence in a 2003 population-based survey of Victorian [Australia] workers and compared these results with stress-related WC statistics for the same year. Job strain prevalence was higher among females than males, and elevated among lower vs. higher occupational skill levels. In comparison, claims were higher among females than males, but primarily among higher skill-level workers. There was some congruence between exposure and WC claims patterns. Highly exposed groups in lower socio-economic positions were underrepresented in claims statistics, suggesting that the WC insurance perspective substantially underestimates the job stress problems for these groups. Thus to provide a sufficient evidence base for equitable policy and practice responses to this growing public health problem, exposure or health outcome data are needed as an essential complement to claims statistics.

Job strain — attributable depression in a sample of working Australians: assessing the contribution to health inequalities

Background The broad aim of this study was to assess the contribution of job strain to mental health inequalities by (a) estimating the proportion of depression attributable to job strain (low control and high demand jobs), (b) assessing variation in attributable risk by occupational skill level, and (c) comparing numbers of job strain–attributable depression cases to numbers of compensated 'mental stress' claims. Methods Standard population attributable risk (PAR) methods were used to estimate the proportion of depression attributable to job strain. An adjusted Odds Ratio (OR) of 1.82 for job strain in relation to depression was obtained from a recently published meta-analysis and combined with exposure prevalence data from the Australian state of Victoria. Job strain exposure prevalence was determined from a 2003 population-based telephone survey of working Victorians (n = 1101, 66% response rate) using validated measures of job control (9 items, Cronbach's alpha = 0.80) and psychological demands (3 items, Cronbach's alpha = 0.66). Estimates of absolute numbers of prevalent cases of depression and successful stress-related workers' compensation claims were obtained from publicly available Australian government sources. Results Overall job strain-population attributable risk (PAR) for depression was 13.2% for males [95% CI 1.1, 28.1] and 17.2% [95% CI 1.5, 34.9] for females. There was a clear gradient of increasing PAR with decreasing occupational skill level. Estimation of job strain–attributable cases (21,437) versus "mental stress" compensation claims (696) suggest that claims statistics underestimate job strain–attributable depression by roughly 30-fold. Conclusion Job strain and associated depression risks represent a substantial, preventable, and inequitably distributed public health problem. The social patterning of job strain-attributable depression parallels the social patterning of mental illness, suggesting that job strain is an important contributor to mental health inequalities. The numbers of compensated 'mental stress' claims compared to job strain-attributable depression cases suggest that there is substantial under-recognition and under-compensation of job strain-attributable depression. Primary, secondary, and tertiary intervention efforts should be substantially expanded, with intervention priorities based on hazard and associated health outcome data as an essential complement to claims statistics.

Area-level unemployment and perceived job insecurity: evidence from a longitudinal survey conducted in the Australian working-age population

Research significance: Job insecurity, the subjective individual anticipation of involuntary job loss, negatively affects employees’ health and their engagement. Although the relationship between job insecurity and health has been extensively studied, job insecurity as an ‘exposure’ has received far less attention, with little known about the upstream determinants of job insecurity in particular. This research sought to identify the relationship between self-rated job insecurity and area-level unemployment using a longitudinal, nationally representative study of Australian households. Methods: Mixed-effect multi-level regression models were used to assess the relationship between area-based unemployment rates and self-reported job insecurity using data from a longitudinal, nationally representative survey running since 2001. Interaction terms were included to test the hypotheses that the relationship between area-level unemployment and job insecurity differed between occupational skill-level groups and by employment arrangement. Marginal effects were computed to visually depict differences in job insecurity across areas with different levels of unemployment. Results: Results indicated that areas with the lowest unemployment rates had significantly lower job insecurity (predicted value 2.74; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.71–2.78, P < 0.001) than areas with higher unemployment (predicted value 2.81; 95% CI 2.79–2.84, P < 0.001). There was a stronger relationship between area-level unemployment and job insecurity among precariously and fixed-term employed workers than permanent workers. Conclusion: These findings demonstrate the independent influences of prevailing economic conditions, individual- and job-level factors on job insecurity. Persons working on a casual basis or on a fixed-term contract in areas with higher levels of unemployment are more susceptible to feelings of job insecurity than those working permanently.

Stakeholder perceptions of job stress in an industrialized country: implications for policy and practice

We used a secondary, qualitative analysis of stakeholder perceptions of work stress in Australia to characterize the context for policy and practice intervention. Themes included: Individual versus contextual descriptions of stress; perceived ‘gender’ differences in manifesting and reporting of stress; the work/home interface; and perceived sectoral and occupational differences in compensation claim rates. We found that people often still perceive stress as an individual rather than organizational problem and view work stress as a stereotypically feminine weakness that affects only certain people. Organizations downplay and overlook risks, increasing worker reluctance to report stressors, creating barriers to job stress interventions. Our study may be relevant to other industrial countries where researchers currently study job stress interventions to improve their effectiveness. Comprehensive approaches can increase knowledge and decrease stigma about job stress and mental illness, and target both work- and non-work-related influences on mental health.