Emerging need for a national policy on psychosocial risk assessment and monitoring in a developing country: A modified Delphi Study

Year 2021, Volume: 5 Issue: 1, 60 - 69, 26.02.2021

Ceyda Şahan , Sibel Kıran , Daniela Converso Yucel Demiral

https://doi.org/10.30621/jbachs.873641

Abstract

Purpose: To create a framework for consensus on the assessment and monitoring of psychosocial risks by taking the opinions of key people from relevant experts and institutions in Turkey.
Methods: A modified Delphi Study was conducted with key experts from different stakeholders and institutions working on psychosocial risk assessment and monitoring policy and practice in Turkey. Representation was not aimed. Purposive and convenient sample was selected by including tripartite structure of occupational health perspective. The study was conducted on June and July 2019 via internet. Two rounded survey method was used to get information from the participants.
Results: The participants were agreed on workload, lack of job security, overwork, the low quality of leadership, insufficient wages, underemployment, mobbing, bullying and discrimination are the most important psychosocial risks in Turkey. Psychosocial risk assessments were not carried out in workplaces due to non-prioritization and negligence. The awareness on psychosocial risks at work is low and no standard approach has been identified in psychosocial risk monitoring. There is a need for an action plan supported by many different disciplines, stakeholders and institutions. Legal infrastructure and guideing is needed for psychosocial risk assessment. Competence of OHS professionals should be ensured for the efficient execution.
Conclusion: Legal regulations and complementary documents are necessary to guide employers and OHS professionals while conducting psychosocial risk management. These actions should be handled with all participation of social partners, sectoral and professional associations.

Keywords

psychosocial risk, policy, delphi study, risk assessment

References

• 1. Eurofound., EU-OSHA. Psychosocial risks in Europe Prevalence and strategies for prevention. In: EU-OSHA Ea, editor. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2014.
• 2. ESP. Implementation of the European Autonomous Framework Agreement on Work-Related Stress. 2008.
• 3. EU. Report on the implementation of the European social partners’ Framework Agreement on Work-related Stress. EUROPEAN COMMISSION; 2011.
• 4. Leka S, Cox T. The European Framework for Psychosocial Risk Management:PRIMA-EF. Nottingham: University of Nottingham; 2008.
• 5. Iavicoli S, Natali E, Deitinger P, Maria Rondinone B, Ertel M, Jain A, et al. Occupational health and safety policy and psychosocial risks in Europe: the role of stakeholders' perceptions. Health policy. 2011;101(1):87-94.
• 6. UN. The Millennium Development Goals Report. United Nations; 2015.
• 7. Gazete R. 2012 [Available from: http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2012/06/20120630-1.htm.
• 8. Sahan C, Demiral Y. The Aspects of Psychosocial Risks Prevention in a Developing Country: Turkey. J Basic Clin Health. 2019;3(1):30-4.
• 9. Haynes E, Palermo C, Reidlinger DP. Modified Policy-Delphi study for exploring obesity prevention priorities. BMJ Open. 2016;6(9):e011788.
• 10. Loë R, Melnychuk N, Murray D, Plummer R. Advancing the State of Policy Delphi Practice: A Systematic Review Evaluating Methodological Evolution, Innovation, and Opportunities. Technological Forecasting & Social Change. 2016;104:78-88.
• 11. Albarqouni L, Hoffmann T, Straus S, Olsen NR, Young T, Ilic D, et al. Core Competencies in Evidence-Based Practice for Health Professionals: Consensus Statement Based on a Systematic Review and Delphi Survey. JAMA network open. 2018;1(2):e180281.
• 12. Forastieri V. Prevention of psychosocial risks and work-related stress. International Journal of Labour Research. 2016;8(1-2):11-33.
• 13. ILO. Psychosocial factors at work: Recognition and control, Report of the Joint ILO/WHO Committee on Occupational Health, Ninth Session, Geneva, 18–24 September 1984. Geneva: International Labour Organisation; 1986.
• 14. Niedhammer I, Sultan-Taieb H, Chastang JF, Vermeylen G, Parent-Thirion A. Exposure to psychosocial work factors in 31 European countries. Occupational medicine. 2012;62(3):196-202.
• 15. González E, Cockburn W, Irastorza X. ESENER - European Survey of Enterprises on New and Emerging Risks. Luxembourg: European Agency for Safety and Health at Work; 2010.
• 16. Kortum E, Leka S, Cox T. Psychosocial risks and work-related stress in developing countries: health impact, priorities, barriers and solutions. International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health. 2010;23(3):225-38.
• 17. Beck D, Berger S, Breutmann N, Fergen A, Gregersen S, Morschhäuser M, et al. Recommendations of the institutions of the Joint German Occupational Safety and Health Strategy (GDA) for implementing psychosocial risk assessment. Berlin: Management of the GDA Mental Health Working Programme c/o Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs Division IIIb 2; 2014.
• 18. FPS. Guide to the prevention of psychosocial risks at work. Federal Public Service. Employment, Labour and Social Dialogue; 2016.
• 19. INAIL. The Methodology for the Assessment and Management of Work-Related Stress Risk. Handbook for companies in compliance with the Legislative Decree 81/2008 and subsequent integrations and modifications. 978-88-7484-119-6: INAIL; 2018.
• 20. Di Tecco C, Ronchetti M, Ghelli M, Russo S, Persechino B, Iavicoli S. Do Italian Companies Manage Work-Related Stress Effectively? A Process Evaluation in Implementing the INAIL Methodology. BioMed research international. 2015;2015:197156.
• 21. Barbaranelli C, Ghezzi V, Di Tecco C, Ronchetti M, Fida R, Ghelli M, et al. Assessing Objective and Verifiable Indicators Associated With Work-Related Stress: Validation of a Structured Checklist for the Assessment and Management of Work-Related Stress. Frontiers in psychology. 2018;9:2424.
• 22. HSE. Tackling work-related stress using the Management Standards approach. A step-by-step workbook. Norwich: TSO (The Stationery Office), part of Williams Lea Tag; 2017.
• 23. INSHT. Some guidelines for assessing psychosocial risk factors (extended edition 2015). Madrid: National Institute of Safety and Health at Work, Spain; 2016.
• 24. SLIC. SLIC Inspection Campaign 2012 Final report. 2012.
• 25. Llorens C, Moncada S. E-IMPRO Report: Drivers and Barriers for Participative Psychosocial Risk Prevention Processes to Change Working Conditions. E-IMPRO Project; 2014.
• 26. Van den Heuvel SG, Bakhuys Roozebom MC, Eekhout E, Venema A, TNO. Management of psychosocial risks in European workplaces - evidence from the second European survey of enterprises on new and emerging risks (ESENER-2). European Risk Observatory Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2018.
• 27. Leka S, Jain A, Iavicoli S, Di Tecco C. An Evaluation of the Policy Context on Psychosocial Risks and Mental Health in the Workplace in the European Union: Achievements, Challenges, and the Future. BioMed research international. 2015;2015:213089.
• 28. Leka S, Jain A. International Initiatives to Tackle Psychosocial Risks and Promote Mental Health in the Workplace: Is There a Good Balance in Policy and Practice? Shimazu A, Bin Nordin R, Dollard M, Oakman J, editors. Switzerland: Springer; 2016. 23-43 p.