How effective are organizational-level interventions in improving the psychosocial work environment, health, and retention of workers? A systematic overview of systematic reviews

• Published in: Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health Vol. 49; no. 5; pp. 315 - 329
• Main Authors: Aust, Birgit, Møller, Jeppe Lykke, Nordentoft, Mads, Frydendall, Karen Bo, Bengtsen, Elizabeth, Jensen, Andreas Brøgger, Garde, Anne Helene, Kompier, Michiel, Semmer, Norbert, Rugulies, Reiner, Jaspers, Sofie Østergaard
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Finland Nordic Association of Occupational Safety and Health 01.07.2023; Nordic Association of Occupational Safety and Health (NOROSH)
• Subjects: Humans; Review; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Working Conditions
• ISSN: 0355-3140; 1795-990X; 1795-990X
• DOI: 10.5271/sjweh.4097

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically review the effectiveness of organizational-level interventions in improving the psychosocial work environment and workers’ health and retention. METHODS: We conducted an overview of systematic reviews on organizational-level interventions published between 2000 and 2020. We systematically searched academic databases, screened reference lists, and contacted experts, yielding 27 736 records. Of the 76 eligible reviews, 24 of weak quality were excluded, yielding 52 reviews of moderate (N=32) or strong (N=20) quality, covering 957 primary studies. We assessed quality of evidence based on quality of review, consistency of results, and proportion of controlled studies. RESULTS: Of the 52 reviews, 30 studied a specific intervention approach and 22 specific outcomes. Regarding intervention approaches, we found strong quality of evidence for interventions focusing on “changes in working time arrangements” and moderate quality of evidence for “influence on work tasks or work organization”, “health care approach changes”, and “improvements of the psychosocial work environment”. Regarding outcomes, we found strong quality of evidence for interventions about “burnout” and moderate quality evidence for “various health and wellbeing outcomes”. For all other types of interventions, quality of evidence was either low or inconclusive, including interventions on retention. CONCLUSIONS: This overview of reviews identified strong or moderate quality of evidence for the effectiveness of organizational-level interventions for four specific intervention approaches and two health outcomes. This suggests that the work environment and the health of employees can be improved by certain organizational-level interventions. We need more research, especially about implementation and context, to improve the evidence.