ArticlePsychotherapy and psychosomatics2025
Effectiveness of Psychotherapeutic Consultation at Work Compared to Care as Usual for Employees with Common Mental Disorders or Subthreshold Symptoms: A Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trial in Germany.
Article in Psychotherapy and psychosomatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intensified return to work clinical aftercare for sick-listed employees with diagnosed mental disorders in Germany: effects of a multicentre randomized controlled trial.BMC psychiatry · 2026Trial
- Changes in perceived psychosocial working conditions after psychotherapeutic consultation at work - exploratory post-hoc analyses from a randomized controlled trial.BMC public health · 2026Trial
- The relationship between psychosocial working conditions and sickness absence days among employees reporting symptoms of common mental disorders in Germany.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2026Trial
- Working conditions and mental health of employees suffering from common mental disorders in Germany with special consideration to the migration generation.BMC psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCommon mental disorders (CMDs) are often work-related, impact work ability and are undertreated. This trial investigates whether psychotherapeutic consultation at work (PT-A) is more effective than care as usual (CAU) in reducing days of sickness absence (DOSA) among affected employees.
methodsA randomized controlled trial (RCT) in five German study centers included employees with CMD or global assessment of functioning (GAF) <81, working ≥15 h/week, recruited via companies and media. After baseline, participants were randomized 1:1 to intervention (IG: up to 16 individual psychotherapy sessions over 9 months) or control (CG: diagnostic session + follow-up call) group. The primary outcome was self-reported DOSA in the last 6 months at 15 months post-baseline (T2). Analyses used intention-to-treat.
resultsFrom 09/2021 to 01/2023, 550 participants, 246 male, 301 female, and 1 diverse, were randomized to IG (n = 279) and CG (n = 270). A total of 403 participants (74%) were first-time users of mental health care. DOSA at T2 were 21 days (SD = 39) in the IG (n = 206) versus 22 days (SD = 39) in the CG (n = 161), no significant treatment effect was observed ([0.65; 1.32], p = 0.679).
conclusionPT-A did not significantly reduce DOSA compared to CAU. However, secondary outcomes showed considerable improvement of clinical symptoms such as depression, anxiety and return-to-work self-efficacy. Therefore, longer observation periods may be needed to assess the effects on DOSA. Moreover, compared to clinical experiences, the high number of men and first-time users indicate an improved accessibility for underserved groups of employees.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.