Skip to main content

Acceptance and barriers to access of occupational e-mental health: cross-sectional findings from a health-risk population of employees

International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health volume 91, pages 305–316 (2018)Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

Occupational e-mental-health (OEMH) may extend existing instruments for preservation or restoration of health and work ability. As a key precondition to efficient implementation, this study examined acceptance and person-centered barriers to potential uptake of OEMH for work-related distress in employees with an elevated risk of early retirement.

Methods

Within the framework of the “Third German Sociomedical Panel of Employees”, 1829 employees with prior sickness absence payments filled out a self-administered questionnaire. Participants had a mean age of 49.93 years (SD = 4.06). 6.2% indicated prior use of eHealth interventions. Potential predictors of acceptance of OEMH were examined based on the “Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology” (UTAUT) extended by work ability, mental health, eHealth literacy and demographic characteristics.

Results

89.1% (n = 1579) showed low to moderate acceptance (M = 2.20, SD = 1.05, range 1–5). A path analysis revealed significant, positive direct effects of UTAUT predictors on acceptance (performance expectancy: 0.48, SE = 0.02, p < 0.001; effort expectancy: 0.20, SE = 0.02, p < 0.001; social influence: 0.28, SE = 0.02, p < 0.001).Online time and frequency of online health information search were further positive direct predictors of acceptance. Model fit was good [χ 2(7) = 12.91, p = 0.07, RMSEA = 0.02, CFI = 1.00, TLI = 0.99, SRMR = 0.01].

Conclusions

Attitudes towards OEMH are rather disadvantageous in the studied risk group. Implementation of OEMH, therefore, requires a-priori education including promotion of awareness, favorable attitudes regarding efficacy and usability in a collaborative approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (Canada)

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Abbreviations

ACC OEMH:

Acceptance of occupational e-mental-health

ANOVA:

Analysis of variance

EE:

Effort expectancy

eHEALS:

eHealth literacy scale

CFI:

Comparative fit index

GPIF:

German pension insurance fund

GSPE:

German sociomedical panel of employees

HAPA:

Health Action Process Model

OEMH:

Occupational e-mental-health

PE:

Performance expectancy

MLR:

Maximum likelihood estimation with robust standard errors

RMSEA:

Root mean square error of approximation

SF-36:

Short form (36) health survey

SI:

Social influence

UTAUT:

Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology

WAI:

Work ability index

References

  • Andersson G, Carlbring P, Ljótsson B, Hedman E (2013) Guided internet-based CBT for common mental disorders. J Contemp Psychother 43(4):223–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apfel T, Riecher-Rössler A (2005) Do psychiatric patients receive disability pension before adequate diagnostics and treatment? Evaluation of 101 psychiatric expertises done on behalf of the Swiss invalidity insurance at the psychiatric outpatient department basel in 2002. Psychiatr Prax 32(04):172–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barak A, Hen L, Boniel-Nissim M, Shapira N (2008) A Comprehensive review and a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of internet-based psychotherapeutic interventions. J Technol Hum Ser 26(2–4):109–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumeister H, Nowoczin L, Lin J, Seifferth H, Seufert J, Laubner K, Ebert DD (2014) Impact of an acceptance facilitating intervention on diabetes patients’ acceptance of Internet-based interventions for depression: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 105(1):30–39

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumeister H, Seifferth H, Lin J, Nowoczin L, Lüking M, Ebert D (2015) Impact of an acceptance facilitating intervention on patients’ acceptance of internet-based pain interventions: a randomized controlled trial. Clin J Pain 31(6):528–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernnat R, Bauer M, Schmidth H, Bieber N, Heusser N, Schönfeld R (2017) Effizienzpotenziale durch eHealth: Studie im Auftrag des Bundesverbands Gesundheits-IT—bvitg. e.V. und der CompuGroup Medical SE. https://www.strategyand.pwc.com/media/file/Effizienzpotentiale-durch-eHealth.pdf. Accessed 03 July 2017

  • Bethge M, Radoschewski FM (2010) Physical and psychosocial work stressors, health-related control beliefs and work ability: cross-sectional findings from the German Sociomedical Panel of Employees. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 83(3):241–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bethge M, Radoschewski FM, Müller-Fahrnow W (2009) Work stress and work ability: cross-sectional findings from the German sociomedical panel of employees. Disabil Rehabil 31(20):1692–1699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bethge M, Spanier K, Peters E, Michel E, Radoschewski M (2017) Self-reported work ability predicts rehabilitation measures, disability pensions, other welfare benefits, and work participation: longitudinal findings from a sample of german employees. J Occup Rehabil. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-017-9733-y

  • Bhattacherjee A, Sanford C (2009) The intention–behaviour gap in technology usage: the moderating role of attitude strength. Behav Inf Technol 28(4):389–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boonstra A, Broekhuis M (2010) Barriers to the acceptance of electronic medical records by physicians from systematic review to taxonomy and interventions. BMC Health Serv Res 10:231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Constantino MJ, Arnkoff DB, Glass CR, Ametrano RM, Smith JZ (2011) Expectations. J Clin Psychol 67(2):184–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corrigan P (2004) How stigma interferes with mental health care. Am Psychol 59(7):614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuijpers P, Donker T, van Straten A, Li J, Andersson G (2010) Is guided self-help as effective as face-to-face psychotherapy for depression and anxiety disorders? A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative outcome studies. Psychol Med 40(12):1943–1957

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsche Rentenversicherung (2017) Rehabilitation report. Update 2016. http://bit.ly/2vpmBOI. Accessed 04 July 2017

  • Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund (2014) Position paper of the German pension insurance fund on the significance of mental illness in rehabilitation and reduction in earning capacity. http://www.deutsche-rentenversicherung.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/339288/publicationFile/64601/pospap_psych_Erkrankung.pdf. Accessed 24 July 2017

  • Dockweiler C (2016) Acceptance of telemedicine. In: eHealth in Germany. Springer, Berlin, pp 257–271

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan CL, Poole C, Boyes N, Redgate J, March S (2015) Australian mental health worker attitudes towards cCBT: what is the role of knowledge? Are there differences? Can we change them? Internet Interv 2(4):372–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebert D, Tarnowski T, Gollwitzer M, Sieland B, Berking M (2013) A transdiagnostic internet-based maintenance treatment enhances the stability of outcome after inpatient cognitive behavioral therapy: a randomized controlled trial. Psychother Psychosom 82(4):246–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebert DD, Berking M, Cuijpers P, Lehr D, Pörtner M, Baumeister H (2015) Increasing the acceptance of internet-based mental health interventions in primary care patients with depressive symptoms. A randomized controlled trial. J Affect Disord 176:9–17

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebert DD, Heber E, Berking M, Riper H, Cuijpers P, Funk B, Lehr D (2016) Self-guided internet-based and mobile-based stress management for employees: results of a randomised controlled trial. Occup Environ Med 73(5):315–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eichenberg C, Wolters C, Brähler E (2013) The Internet as a mental health advisor in Germany—results of a national survey. PLoS One 8(11):e79206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisinga R, Grotenhuis M, Pelzer B (2013) The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or Spearman-Brown? Int J Public Health 58(4):637–642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frese M (1999) Social support as a moderator of the relationship between work stressors and psychological dysfunctioning: a longitudinal study with objective measures. J Occup Health Psychol 4(3):179–192

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gauck J (2012) DIVSI milieu-study on trust and security in the Internet. https://www.divsi.de/publikationen/studien/divsi-milieu-studie-zu-vertrauen-und-sicherheit-im-internet-aktualisierung-2013/einfuhrung/. Accessed 11 July 17

  • Gjesdal S, Ringdal PR, Haug K, Mæland JG (2004) Predictors of disability pension in long-term sickness absence: results from a population-based and prospective study in Norway 1994–1999. Eur J Public Health 14(4):398–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gun SY, Titov N, Andrews G (2011) Acceptability of Internet treatment of anxiety and depression. Australas Psychiatry 19(3):259–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel RM (1993) The rand 36-item health survey 1.0. Health Econ 2(3):217–227

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heber E, Ebert DD, Lehr D, Cuijpers P, Berking M, Nobis S, Riper H (2017) The benefit of web- and computer-based interventions for stress: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res 19(2):e32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedman E, Andersson E, Ljotsson B, Andersson G, Ruck C, Lindefors N (2011) Cost-effectiveness of Internet-based cognitive behavior therapy vs. cognitive behavioral group therapy for social anxiety disorder: results from a randomized controlled trial. Behav Res Ther 49(11):729–736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson M, Harvey SB, Øverland S, Mykletun A, Hotopf M (2011) Work and common psychiatric disorders. J R Soc Med 104(5):198–207

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennemann S, Beutel ME, Zwerenz R (2016) Drivers and barriers to acceptance of web-based aftercare of patients in inpatient routine care: a cross-sectional survey. J Med Internet Res 18(12):e337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennemann S, Beutel ME, Zwerenz R (2017a) ‘Morbus Google’ vs. e-Health: a qualitative study of acceptance and implementation of online-aftercare in inpatient rehabilitation. Rehabilitation (Stuttg). http://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-102150

  • Hennemann S, Beutel ME, Zwerenz R (2017b) Ready for eHealth? Health professionals’ acceptance and adoption of ehealth interventions in inpatient routine care. J Health Commun 22(3):274–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu L, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6(1):1–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Internet Society (2016) Global Internet Report. http://bit.ly/2fQDYzm. Accessed 15 Feb 2017

  • Karpansalo M, Manninen P, Kauhanen J, Lakka TA, Salonen JT (2004) Perceived health as a predictor of early retirement. Scand J Work Environ Health 30(4):287–292

  • Klein JP, Gerlinger G, Knaevelsrud C, Bohus M, Meisenzahl E, Kersting A, Röhr S, Riedel-Heller SG, Sprick U, Dirmaier J (2016) Internet-based interventions in the treatment of mental disorders. Overview, quality criteria perspectives. Der Nervenarzt 87(11):1185–1193

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch W, Frees B (2016) Results of the ARD/ZDF online study 2016: Dynamic developement in mobile Internet use and in audio/video. Media Perspektiven 9(2016):418–437

    Google Scholar 

  • Kontos E, Blake DK, Chou SW, Prestin A (2014) Predictors of eHealth usage: insights on the digital divide from the health information national trends survey 2012. J Med Internet Res 16(7):e172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehr D, Geraedts A, Asplund RP, Khadjesari Z, Heber E, Bloom J de, Ebert DD, Angerer P, Funk B (2016a) Occupational e-mental health: current approaches and promising perspectives for promoting mental health in workers. Healthy at work. Springer, Berlin, pp 257–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehr D, Heber E, Sieland B, Hillert A, Funk B, Ebert DD (2016b) Occupational eMental Health and teachers’ health: a meta-analytic review on the efficacy of internet-based intervention for promoting mental health in teachers. Prävention Gesundheitsförderung 11(3):182–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li J, Talaei-Khoei A, Seale H, Ray P, MacIntyre CR (2013) Health care provider adoption of eHealth: systematic literature review. Interact J Med Res 2(1):e7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu L, Miguel Cruz A, Rios Rincon A, Buttar V, Ranson Q, Goertzen D (2015) What factors determine therapists’ acceptance of new technologies for rehabilitation—a study using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT). Disabil Rehabil 37(5):447–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menachemi N, Brooks RG (2006) EHR and other IT adoption among physicians: results of a large-scale statewide analysis. J Healthc Inf Manag 20(3):79–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Menachemi N, Langley A, Brooks RG (2007) The use of information technologies among rural and urban physicians in Florida. J Med Syst 31(6):483–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morfeld M, Kirchberger I, Bullinger M (2011) SF-36 Questionnaire. German version of the Short Form-36 Health Survey. Hogrefe, Göttingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Mykletun A, Overland S, Dahl AA, Krokstad S, Bjerkeset O, Glozier N, Aarø LE, Prince M (2006) A population-based cohort study of the effect of common mental disorders on disability pension awards. Am J Psychiatry 163(8):1412–1418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neter E, Brainin E (2012) eHealth literacy: extending the digital divide to the realm of health information. J Med Internet Res 14(1):e19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordgren LB, Hedman E, Etienne J, Bodin J, Kadowaki Å, Eriksson S, Lindkvist E, Andersson G, Carlbring P (2014) Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of individually tailored Internet-delivered cognitive behavior therapy for anxiety disorders in a primary care population: a randomized controlled trial. Behav Res Ther 59:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman CD, Skinner AH (2006) eHealth literacy: essential skills for consumer health in a networked world. J Med Internet Res 8(2):e9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petermann F, Koch U (2009) Psychosomatic rehabilitation: Quo Vadis? Rehabilitation (Stuttg) 48(05):257–262

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schröder J, Sautier L, Kriston L, Berger T, Meyer B, Späth C, Köther U, Nestoriuc Y, Klein JP, Moritz S (2015) Development of a questionnaire measuring Attitudes towards Psychological Online Interventions—the APOI. J Affect Disord 187:136–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarzer R (2008) Modeling health behavior change: How to predict and modify the adoption and maintenance of health behaviors. Appl Psychol 57(1):1–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soellner R, Huber S, Reder M (2014) The concept of eHealth literacy and its measurement: German translation of the eHEALS. J Media Psychol 26(1):29–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stansfeld S, Candy B (2006) Psychosocial work environment and mental health—a meta-analytic review. Scand J Work Environ Health 32(6):443–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taiwo AA, Downe AG (2013) The theory of user acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): a meta-analytic review of empirical findings. J Theor Appl Inf Technol 49(1):48–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiart H, Lehr D, Ebert DD, Berking M, Riper H (2015) Log in and breathe out: internet-based recovery training for sleepless employees with work-related strain—results of a randomized controlled trial. Scand J Work Environ Health 41(2):164–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topooco N, Riper H, Araya R, Berking M, Brunn M, Chevreul K, Cieslak R, Ebert DD, Etchmendy E, Herrero R, Kleiboer A, Krieger T, García-Palacios A, Cerga-Pashoja A, Smoktunowicz E, Urech A, Vis C, Andersson G (2017) Attitudes towards digital treatment for depression: a European stakeholder survey. Internet Interv 08:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuomi K, Huuhtanen P, Nykyri E, Ilmarinen J (2001) Promotion of work ability, the quality of work and retirement. Occup Med (Lond) 51(5):318–324

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh V, Davis FD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manage Sci 46(2):186–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q 27(3):425–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallin EEK, Mattsson S, Olsson EMG, Eysenbach G (2016) the preference for internet-based psychological interventions by individuals without past or current use of mental health treatment delivered online: a survey study with mixed-methods analysis. JMIR Mental Health 3(2):e25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang PS, Lane M, Olfson M, Pincus HA, Wells KB, Kessler RC (2005) Twelve-month use of mental health services in the united states: results from the national comorbidity survey replication. Arch Gen Psychiatry 62(6):629–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WHO (1998) A health telematics policy: report of WHO group consultation on health telematics. WHO, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Yardley L, Morrison L, Bradbury K, Muller I (2015) The person-based approach to intervention development: application to digital health-related behavior change interventions. J Med Internet Res 17(1):e30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan K, Bentler PM (2000) Three likelihood-based methods for mean and covariance structure analysis with nonnormal missing data. Soc Methodol 30(1):165–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwerenz R, Knickenberg RJ, Schattenburg L, Beutel ME (2004) Work-related stress and resources of psychosomatic patients compared to the general population. Rehabilitation (Stuttg) 43(1):10–16

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwerenz R, Becker J, Gerzymisch K, Siepmann M, Holme M, Kiwus U, Spörl-Dönch S, Beutel ME (2017) Evaluation of a transdiagnostic psychodynamic online intervention to support return to work: a randomized controlled trial. PLoS One 12(5):e0176513

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The GSPE-III has been funded by the German Pension Insurance Fund according to § 31 section 1 Nr. 5 SGB VI. The authors would like to thank Julian Thukral for his project assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Psychology, Psychotherapy and Experimental Psychopathology, Institute of Psychology, University of Mainz, Wallstraße 3, 55122, Mainz, Germany

    Severin Hennemann & Michael Witthöft

  2. Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Luebeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562, Lübeck, Germany

    Matthias Bethge & Katja Spanier

  3. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center, Gutenberg University Mainz, Untere Zahlbacher Str. 8, 55131, Mainz, Germany

    Manfred E. Beutel & Rüdiger Zwerenz

Authors
  1. Severin Hennemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Witthöft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Matthias Bethge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Katja Spanier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Manfred E. Beutel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Rüdiger Zwerenz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Severin Hennemann.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hennemann, S., Witthöft, M., Bethge, M. et al. Acceptance and barriers to access of occupational e-mental health: cross-sectional findings from a health-risk population of employees. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 91, 305–316 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-017-1280-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-017-1280-5

Keywords

  • Occupational e-mental health
  • Acceptance
  • Mental health
  • Work ability
  • Cohort study