The topic of stress is a high priority on the public agenda in Denmark and there have been significant efforts made both to prevent and deal with stress. Whether these efforts are having a positive impact is insufficiently monitored, according to a new analysis of the National Institute of Public Health. The latter has identified several problems concerning stress prevention and treatment programmes, including a lack of programmes targeting people outside the labour market.
The issue of stress as a problem
In Denmark, stress has a high priority status on the public agenda. Much research has been carried out and it is estimated that about 10%–12% of the employees are seriously stressed (DK0704019I). Despite the issue of stress becoming an increased problem among employees, no national strategy has been developed in Denmark on how to prevent and treat this problem. The increased focus on stress as a problem has led to a greater number of courses, lectures and stress management programmes but, according to a recently published report, the impact of these initiatives is often not evaluated on a scientific basis. More attention should therefore be focused on assessing these efforts to attain greater knowledge on how to prevent and treat stress successfully, in order to develop an effective national strategy.
Prevention and treatment of stress
The National Institute of Public Health (Statens Institut for Folkesundhed, SIF) has published a report on Prevention and treatment of stress in Denmark (Forebyggelse og behandling af stress i Danmark (404Kb PDF)). This study aimed to assess the effects of the efforts taken to prevent and treat stress, as it is believed that prevention and treatment of stress is done randomly without sufficient evaluation of the actual outcomes of these efforts. Some programmes include an impact assessment; these primarily aim to collect knowledge on effective stress prevention and treatment methods. However, the majority of initiatives do not provide for such monitoring.
To date, no common strategy exists on how to deal with stress at the workplace and its related health problems. The Working Environment Information Centre (Videnscenter for Arbejdsmiljø) and the National Research Centre for the Working Environment (Det Nationale Forskningscenter for Arbejdsmiljø, NFA) recommend that stress prevention should be integrated into human resource (HR) policies to increase employees’ influence on the workplace situation. In addition, both centres advocate that solidarity between employees should be strengthened and clear guidelines should exist at the workplace on how to identify and help stressed employees. However, according to the analysis, it is difficult to assess the effect of the preventive measures, as these are insufficiently monitored.
Most of the participants in stress prevention and stress management programmes are salaried employees aged between 30 and 59 years. A slightly higher number of women are participating in stress prevention and treatment programmes (for gender aspects of self-reported stress in Denmark, see DK0512NU04).
Main concerns highlighted by the research
The SIF report identifies several problems of the stress prevention and treatment programmes in Denmark.
- People of various professions offer programmes dealing with stress prevention, management and treatment. Most of these are psychologists, doctors, sociologists or certified training coaches; however, some professionals who do not have any specific training in the prevention and treatment of stress also offer such programmes. Consequently, it can be difficult for employers and employees to distinguish between ‘alternative’ and established stress treatment programmes. Companies and/or employees may thus pay for a programme which does not provide any help and, at worst, can lead to a further deterioration of the situation at the workplace.
- As stress is primarily seen as an individual problem, the focus is mainly on the individual when stress is to be treated. SIF considers this focus as being problematic, since individuals may blame themselves for being stressed and this may lead to a further deterioration of the situation. Such a focus on the individual can also be problematic if the causes of stress are to be found at the organisational level. It may thus be important to examine whether changes in working procedures or organisational structures might have an effect on the prevention and treatment of stress.
- Only a limited amount of people outside the labour market, such as students, unemployed and retired people or workers on sick leave, receive appropriate stress-related treatment. This is inadequate, since stress is a problem affecting not just workers. As people suffering from stress are not a homogenous group, it is important that stress prevention and treatment programmes target different groups in society so that those individuals with limited resources are not excluded from such programmes. According to SIF, this may have negative consequences concerning social equality in terms of health.
Mette Ballebye and Helle Ourø Nielsen, Oxford Research
