Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jun 7;13(1):152.
doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02569-2.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing workplace interventions to promote mental health: qualitative evidence synthesis

Charlotte Paterson  1 , Caleb Leduc  2   3 , Margaret Maxwell  4 , Birgit Aust  5 , Heather Strachan  1 , Ainslie O'Connor  6 , Fotini Tsantila  7 , Johanna Cresswell-Smith  8 , Gyorgy Purebl  9 , Lars Winter  10 , Naim Fanaj  11   12 , Asmae Doukani  13 , Bridget Hogg  14   15 , Paul Corcoran  2   3 , Luigia D'Alessandro  16 , Sharna Mathieu  17   18 , Ulrich Hegerl  19   20 , Ella Arensman  2   3   21 , Birgit A Greiner  2 ; MENTUPP Consortium
Collaborators, Affiliations

Barriers and facilitators to implementing workplace interventions to promote mental health: qualitative evidence synthesis

Charlotte Paterson et al. Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Despite growing interest in workplace mental health interventions, evidence of their effectiveness is mixed. Implementation science offers a valuable lens to investigate the factors influencing successful implementation. However, evidence synthesis is lacking, especially for small-to-medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and for specific work sectors. The objectives of this review are to establish the scope of research with explicit analysis of implementation aspects of workplace mental health interventions and to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation in general and within SMEs and selected sectors.

Methods: A systematic scoping review and meta-synthesis of mixed methods process evaluation research from 11 databases, with the evaluation of methodological quality (MMAT) and confidence in findings (CERQual), was conducted. We selected information-rich studies and synthesised them using domains within the Nielsen and Randall implementation framework: context, intervention activities, implementation; and mental models.

Results: We included 43 studies published between 2009 and 2022, of which 22 were rated as information-rich to be analysed for barriers and facilitators. Most studies were conducted in healthcare. Facilitators reflecting 'high confidence' included: relevant and tailored content, continuous and pro-active leadership buy-in and support, internal or external change agents/champions, assistance from managers and peers, resources, and senior-level experience and awareness of mental health issues. Healthcare sector-specific facilitators included: easy accessibility with time provided, fostering relationships, clear communication, and perceptions of the intervention. Stigma and confidentiality issues were reported as barriers overall. Due to the small number of studies within SMEs reported findings did not reach 'high confidence'. A lack of studies in construction and Information and Communication Technology meant separate analyses were not possible.

Conclusions: There is dependable evidence of key factors for the implementation of workplace mental health interventions which should be used to improve implementation. However, there is a lack of studies in SMEs and in a larger variety of sectors.

Systematic review registration: Research Registry ( reviewregistry897 ).

Keywords: Barriers and facilitators; Implementation science; Mental health; Organisation interventions; Scoping review; Systematic review; Wellbeing; Workplace.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Nielsen and Randall’s [73] framework of factors influencing the implementation of occupational health interventions
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
PRISMA 2020 flow diagram. Adapted from: Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. 10.1136/bmj.n71. For more information, visit: http://www.prisma-statement.org/
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. World Health Organization. Mental Health at Work. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-at-work. Accessed 30 May 2024.
    1. Gallup. State of the Global Workplace. Gallup; 2022. Available from: https://www.gallup.com/workplace/349484/state-of-the-global-workplace-20.... [cited 2022 Nov 25].
    1. Santomauro DF, Herrera AMM, Shadid J, Zheng P, Ashbaugh C, Pigott DM, et al. Global prevalence and burden of depressive and anxiety disorders in 204 countries and territories in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet. 2021;398(10312):1700–12. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02143-7. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bang Madsen K, Vogdrup Petersen L, Plana-Ripoll O, Musliner KL, Philippe Debost JC, Hordam Gronemann F, et al. Early labor force exits in patients with treatment-resistant depression: an assessment of work years lost in a Danish nationwide register-based cohort study. Ther Adv Psychopharmacol. 2020;10:2045125320973791. doi: 10.1177/2045125320973791. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lamberg T, Virtanen P, Vahtera J, Luukkaala T, Koskenvuo M. Unemployment, depressiveness and disability retirement: a follow-up study of the Finnish HeSSup population sample. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2010;45(2):259–64. doi: 10.1007/s00127-009-0063-z. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types