2022-06-27, Küllenberg, Janna, Born, Marieke, Drews, Antonia, Bossmann, Ulrike, Zwack, Julika, Gündel, Harald, Schweitzer-Rothers, Jochen

Purpose – Mid-level executives are confronted with many dilemma situations, in which they are forced to decide between conflicting options, none of them leading to the desired result. If they fail to cope with them constructively, their individual risk for mental strains increases (Gerlmaier and Latniak, 2013). Initial findings focusing on executives in industry (Bossmann, 2020) show that fostering effective dilemma management in executives is a preventive factor against stress-related diseases. Yet, there is little empirical research that evaluates the contribution of dilemma management training on leadership’s mental health prevention in hospitals. This study aims to examine whether such a training program, adapted to current working conditions in German hospitals, promotes mid-level executives’ mental health. Design/methodology/approach – A 10-month training program was administered to N = 69 senior physicians, senior nurses and senior service and administrative staff in four hospitals. To evaluate training effects on perceived stress reactivity, on cognitive and emotional irritation over time as well as the effects of the training dose on these results, participants’ self-reported measures were collected at four points in time: before (t0), during (t1), immediately after (t2) and three months after the intervention (t3). Findings – Overall, participants showed less cognitive irritation and perceived stress reactivity over time. However, their emotional irritation did not change significantly. The dose of training participation did not moderate these results. Originality/value – This paper contributes to the prevention of stress-related diseases and the promotion of sensemaking in mid-level executives’ dilemma management routine in the face of increasingly aggravating working conditions due to financial restrictions in the German health-care system. Findings of this study are explained in greater depth using previously reported qualitative data fromthe same research project.

2021-05-20, Stiawa, Maja, Peters, Martin, Mulfinger, Nadine, Krumm, Silvia, Worringer, Britta, Maatouk, Imad, Küllenberg, Janna, Junne, Florian, Genrich, Melanie, Gündel, Harald, Puschner, Bernd

Ziel der Studie Befragung von Mitarbeitern im Krankenhaus zu arbeitsbedingten Fehlbelastungen und Stressfolgen sowie Konsequenzen für Interventionen zur Stressreduktion am Arbeitsplatz. Methodik Es wurden 6 Fokusgruppen und 7 semistrukturierte Interviews mit 34 Krankenhausmitarbeitern durchgeführt, welche inhaltsanalytisch ausgewertet wurden. Ergebnisse Mitarbeiter berichteten von Stressfolgen durch Personalmangel, hohes Arbeitsaufkommen, fehlende Rückzugs- und Versorgungsmöglichkeiten, fehlende Absprachen, intransparente Arbeitsabläufe, Teamkonflikte und fehlende Wertschätzung. Berichtete Faktoren, die zur Reduktion von Stressfolgen führten, waren soziale Unterstützung, Arbeitszeitreduktion, Sport und Entscheidungskompetenzen. Schlussfolgerung Interventionen zur Reduktion arbeitsbedingter Fehlbelastungen im Krankenhaus sollten sowohl berufsgruppenspezifische Interventionsangebote sowie organisationale Normen und strukturelle Rahmenbedingungen berücksichtigen.

2019-12-17, Mulfinger, Nadine, Sander, Anja, Stuber, Felicitas, Brinster, Regina, Junne, Florian, Limprecht, Ronald, Jarczok, Marc N., Seifried-Dübon, Tanja, Rieger, Monika, Zipfel, Stephan, Peters, Martin, Stiawa, Maja, Maatouk, Imad, Helaß, Madeleine, Nikendei, Christoph, Rothermund, Eva, Hander, Nicole, Ziegenhain, Ute, Gulde, Manuela, Genrich, Melanie, Worringer, Britta, Küllenberg, Janna, Blum, Karl, Süss, Stefan, Gesang, Elena, Ruhle, Sascha, Müller, Andreas, Schweitzer-Rothers, Jochen, Angerer, Peter, Gündel, Harald

Background Health care employees in Germany and worldwide are exposed to a variety of stressors. However, most of the hospitals in Germany lack a systematic workplace health management. Thus, this study aims at the evaluation of the effects of a behavioural as well as organisational (´complex´) intervention on the mental health and well-being of hospital staff. Methods Mental health in the hospital workplace (SEElische GEsundheit am Arbeitsplatz KrankeNhaus – SEEGEN) is an unblinded, multi-centred cluster-randomised open trial with two groups (intervention group (IG) and waitlist control group (CG)). Study participants in the intervention clusters will receive the complex intervention; study participants in the waitlist control clusters will receive the complex intervention after the last follow-up measurement. The intervention consists of five behavioural and organisational intervention modules that are specifically tailored to hospital employees at different hierarchical and functional levels. Hospital staff may select one specific module according to their position and specific needs or interests. Towards the end of the intervention roundtable discussions with representatives from all professional groups will be held to facilitate organisational change. Primary outcome is the change in emotional and cognitive strain in the working environment, from baseline (T0) to 6 month-follow up (T1), between IG and CG. In addition, employees who do not participate in the modules are included in the trial by answering shorter questionnaires (cluster participants). Furthermore, using mixed methods, a process evaluation will identify uptake of the intervention, and mediators and moderators of the effect. Discussion There seems to be growing psychological strain on people working in the health care sector worldwide. This study will examine whether investing directly in the hospital staff and their interpersonal relationship may lead to measurable benefits in subjective well-being at the workplace and improved economic performance indicators of the hospital. In case of a positive outcome, health promotion strategies looking at behavioural as well as organisational components within the hospital may gain additional importance, especially in regard of the growing financial pressure within the health sector.