Positioning work-related stress – General practitioners’ reasoning about a brief intervention

Abstract

Abstract Background General practitioners (GP) can find it difficult to early detect and treat ill health due to work-related stress. In a randomized controlled trial, a brief early intervention using the work stress questionnaire (WSQ) combined with feedback at consultation was tested to reduce sick leave. This study explored GPs' reasoning about using the intervention. Methods A focus group study was performed with 23 GPs at six primary health care centers, each constituting one focus group. The discussions, lasting between 30-45 minutes, were analyses based on a method by Krueger. Results The GPs positioned work-related stress by making fundamental standpoints on stress and how it should be handled, in order to make sense of their work concerning work-related stress. In addition, they acted to the best of their ability with assigned resources to treat patients with ill health due to stress. Further, the GPs set their regular and preferred way of practicing daily work against the intervention's degree of intrusion and benefits. When the resources and daily work changed, the GPs formed a revised understanding of stress and how it should be handled. Conclusions The GPs found their ordinary way of working to be sufficient for early identification and treatment of patients with ill health due to work-related stress. However, when resources were scarce, the responsibility to handle these patients was questioned. Competence and interprofessional collaboration are therefore needed to early identify and treat ill health due to work-related stress. In addition, the GPs' responsibility in relation to other actors must be clarified. Key messages The primary health care’s role for patients perceiving work-related stress was not given. The GPs’ confidence in addressing ill health due to work-related stress depended on assigned resources.