Collaboration among occupational health physicians, primary care physicians and psychotherapists in the prevention and treatment of common mental disorders in employees has been scarcely researched. To identify potential for improvement, these professions were surveyed in Baden-Württemberg (Germany). Four hundred and fifty occupational health physicians, 1000 primary care physicians and 700 resident medical and psychological psychotherapists received a standardized questionnaire about their experiences, attitudes and wishes regarding activities for primary, secondary and tertiary prevention of common mental disorders in employees. The response rate of the questionnaire was 30% (n = 133) among occupational health physicians, 14% (n = 136) among primary care physicians and 27% (n = 186) among psychotherapists. Forty percent of primary care physicians and 33% of psychotherapists had never had contact with an occupational health physician. Psychotherapists indicated more frequent contact with primary care physicians than vice versa (73% and 49%, respectively). Better cooperation and profession-specific training on mental disorders and better knowledge about work-related stress were endorsed. For potentially involved stakeholders, the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration for better prevention and care of employees with common mental disorders is very high. Nevertheless, there is only little collaboration in practice. To establish quality-assured cooperation structures in practice, participants need applicable frameworks on an organizational and legal level.

Background: Leaders in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are exposed to increased stress as a result of a range of challenges. Moreover, they rarely have the opportunity to participate in stress management trainings. Therefore, KMU-GO (ger: Kleine und mittlere Unternehmen – Gesundheitsoffensive; en: small and medium-sized enterprises – health campaign) aims at conducting and evaluating such a stress management training. The focus of evaluation does not only lie on the effects on leaders participating but also on their employees. Methods: The study is planned as a 2 × 3 mixed design with two groups (intervention and waiting control group) as a between factor and point in time (at baseline, 6 and 12 months later) as a within factor. We aim at collecting data from N = 200 leaders. Based on the results of a preceding assessment, an already successfully implemented stress management training was adapted to SME needs and now serves as the framework of this intervention. The stress management training comprises one and a half days and is followed by two booster sessions (each 180 min) about 3 and 6 months after the training. The main focus of this intervention lies on specifying leaders stress reactivity while at the same time investigating its effects on employees’ mental health. Further dependent variables are leaders´ depression and anxiety scores, effort-reward imbalance, sick days and psychophysiological measures of heart rate variability, hair cortisol, and salivary alpha-amylase. Cost-effectiveness analyses will be conducted from a societal and employers’ point of view. Discussion: Stress management is a highly relevant issue for leaders in SMEs. By providing an adequate occupational stress management training, we expect to improve leaders´ and also employees` mental health, thereby preventing economic losses for SMEs and the national economy. However, collecting data from employees about the success of a stress management training of their leader is a highly sensitive topic. It requires a carefully planned proceeding ensuring for example a high degree of transparency, anonymity, and providing team incentives. Trial registration: The KMU-GO trial is registered at the German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS): DRKS00023457 (05.11.2020)

The bio‐psycho‐social model highlights intra‐individual and inter‐individual interactions, including psychotherapy. The processing of these interactions within a person takes place, among others, in the central autonomic network (CAN). The CAN's autonomic output to the periphery can be indexed by heart rate variability (HRV), representing individual adaptive capacity. Further, the CAN influences the hypothalamus‐pituitary–adrenal axis with its product cortisol. The aim consisted in investigating HRV and cortisol as well as their relation to symptom course in response to short‐term psychotherapy. A single‐arm, uncontrolled, explorative study was conducted at an outpatient psychotherapeutic consultation in the workplace offered to employees with mental or psychosomatic complaints. Questionnaires included symptoms of depression, irritation and functional impairment. Circadian profile of HRV and salivary cortisol concentrations collected pre and post short‐term psychotherapeutic intervention (4–12 sessions) were assessed. Multilevel‐linear mixed regressions were calculated. Out of 29 participants (mean age 42; 72% female), 24% were on sick leave from work. Cortisol concentrations were neither affected by intervention nor by symptom course. The proportion of individuals showing a vagally mediated HRV in the range of the lowest quartile assessed for age‐ and sex‐matched healthy controls was reduced at follow‐up (pre 34%, post 22%; p = .017). Higher vagally mediated HRV at baseline predicted lower symptom burden at follow‐up. Thus, the results support the assumption that HRV reflects the capability of an organism to adapt and recover. Patients with reduced HRV might need additional psychotherapeutic sessions to achieve the same symptom improvements than patients with retained HRV.

Hypertension is a major cardiovascular (CV) risk factor and is predicted by heightened CV reactivity to stress in healthy individuals. Patients with hypertension also show an altered stress response, while insecure attachment is linked to a heightened stress reactivity as well. This is the first study aiming to assess attachment representations in patients with primary hypertension and to investigate their CV responses when their attachment system is activated. We studied 50 patients (38 men, 12 women) with primary hypertension. The Adult Attachment Projective Picture System (AAP), a widely used and validated interview, was performed to measure the patients’ attachment representations, and to activate their attachment system. Blood pressure and heart rate were measured after ten minutes at rest prior to and directly after the AAP interview. Mood and state anxiety were assessed using the Multidimensional Mood State Questionnaire (MDBF) and the State Trait Anxiety Inventory – State (STAI-S) before and after the experiment. The prevalence of insecure attachment (dismissing, preoccupied, unresolved) in hypertensive patients was predominant (88%), while in non-clinical populations, only about 50% of individuals had insecure attachment patterns. Blood pressure (p<.001), heart rate (p=.016) and rate pressure product (p<.001) significantly increased in response to the attachment interview. Secure attached patients showed the highest rise in systolic blood pressure (p=.020) and the lowest heart rate compared to the other attachment groups (p=.043). However, attachment representation showed no significant group or interaction effects on diastolic blood pressure and rate pressure product. Insecure attachment was highly over-represented in our sample of patients with primary hypertension. Additionally, a robust CV response to the attachment-activating stimulus was observed. Our data suggest that insecure attachment is significantly linked to primary hypertension, which implies the need for further investigations to evaluate attachment insecurity as a possible risk factor for hypertension.

The rising burden of common mental disorders (CMDs) in employees requires strategies for prevention. No systematic data exist about how those involved perceive their roles, responsibilities, and interactions with other professional groups. Therefore, we performed a multi-professional standardized survey with health professionals in Germany. A self-administered questionnaire was completed by 133 occupational health physicians (OHPs), 136 primary care physicians (PCPs), 186 psychotherapists (PTs), and 172 human resource managers (HRMs). Inter alia, they were asked which health professionals working in the company health service and in the outpatient care or in the sector of statutory insurance agents should play a key role in the primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention of CMDs in employees. The McNemar test was used in order to compare the attributed roles among the professionals involved. With regard to CMDs, all the professional groups involved in this study declared OHPs as the most relevant pillar in the field of prevention. In primary prevention, HRMs regarded themselves, OHPs, and health insurance agents as equally relevant in terms of prevention. PTs indicated an important role for employee representatives in this field. In secondary prevention, PCPs were regarded as important as OHPs. HRMs indicated themselves as equally important as OHPs and PCPs. In tertiary prevention, only OHPs identified themselves as main protagonists. The other groups marked a variety of several professions. There is a common acceptance from the parties involved that might help the first steps be taken toward overcoming barriers, e.g., by developing a common framework for quality-assured intersectional cooperation in the field of CMD prevention in employees.