Dataset Information

Pathways to Employee Outcomes in a Workplace Health Promotion Program.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

This study examined the relationship between employee outcomes and employer implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for chronic disease prevention.

Design

Cross-sectional samples collected at 3 time points in a cluster-randomized, controlled trial of a workplace health promotion program to promote 12 EBIs.

Setting

King County, WA.

Sample

Employees of 63 small, low-wage workplaces.

Measures

Employer EBI implementation; 3 types of employee outcomes: perceived implementation of EBIs; perceived employer support for health; and health-related behaviors, perceived stress, depression risk, and presenteeism.

Analysis

Intent-to-treat and correlation analyses using generalized estimating equations. We tested bivariate associations along potential paths from EBI implementation, through perceived EBI implementation and perceived support for health, to several employee health-related outcomes.

Results

The intent-to-treat analysis found similar employee health-related behaviors in intervention and control workplaces at 15 and 24 months. Workplaces implemented varying combinations of EBIs, however, and bivariate associations were significant for 4 of the 6 indicators of physical activity and healthy eating, as well as perceived stress, depression risk, and presenteeism. We did not find significant positive associations for cancer screening and tobacco cessation.

Conclusion

Our findings support broader dissemination of EBIs for physical activity and healthy eating, as well as more focus on improving employer support for employee health. They also suggest we need better interventions for cancer screening and tobacco cessation.

SUBMITTER: Harris JR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9012684 | biostudies-literature | 2022 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Pathways to Employee Outcomes in a Workplace Health Promotion Program.

Harris Jeffrey R JR Kava Christine M CM Chan Kwun C Gary KCG Kohn Marlana J MJ Hammerback Kristen K Parrish Amanda T AT Helfrich Christian D CD Hannon Peggy A PA

American journal of health promotion : AJHP 20220104 4

<h4>Purpose</h4>This study examined the relationship between employee outcomes and employer implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for chronic disease prevention.<h4>Design</h4>Cross-sectional samples collected at 3 time points in a cluster-randomized, controlled trial of a workplace health promotion program to promote 12 EBIs.<h4>Setting</h4>King County, WA.<h4>Sample</h4>Employees of 63 small, low-wage workplaces.<h4>Measures</h4>Employer EBI implementation; 3 types of employee ...[more]

PMID: 34983199

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceEmployers have increasingly invested in workplace wellness programs to improve employee health and decrease health care costs. However, there is little experimental evidence on the effects of these programs.ObjectiveTo evaluate a multicomponent workplace wellness program resembling programs offered by US employers.Design, setting, and participantsThis clustered randomized trial was implemented at 160 worksites from January 2015 through June 2016. Administrative claims and employment data were gathered continuously through June 30, 2016; data from surveys and biometrics were collected from July 1, 2016, through August 31, 2016.InterventionsThere were 20 randomly selected treatment worksites (4037 employees) and 140 randomly selected control worksites (28 937 employees, including 20 primary control worksites [4106 employees]). Control worksites received no wellness programming. The program comprised 8 modules focused on nutrition, physical activity, stress reduction, and related topics implemented by registered dietitians at the treatment worksites.Main outcomes and measuresFour outcome domains were assessed. Self-reported health and behaviors via surveys (29 outcomes) and clinical measures of health via screenings (10 outcomes) were compared among 20 intervention and 20 primary control sites; health care spending and utilization (38 outcomes) and employment outcomes (3 outcomes) from administrative data were compared among 20 intervention and 140 control sites.ResultsAmong 32 974 employees (mean [SD] age, 38.6 [15.2] years; 15 272 [45.9%] women), the mean participation rate in surveys and screenings at intervention sites was 36.2% to 44.6% (n = 4037 employees) and at primary control sites was 34.4% to 43.0% (n = 4106 employees) (mean of 1.3 program modules completed). After 18 months, the rates for 2 self-reported outcomes were higher in the intervention group than in the control group: for engaging in regular exercise (69.8% vs 61.9%; adjusted difference, 8.3 percentage points [95% CI, 3.9-12.8]; adjusted P = .03) and for actively managing weight (69.2% vs 54.7%; adjusted difference, 13.6 percentage points [95% CI, 7.1-20.2]; adjusted P = .02). The program had no significant effects on other prespecified outcomes: 27 self-reported health outcomes and behaviors (including self-reported health, sleep quality, and food choices), 10 clinical markers of health (including cholesterol, blood pressure, and body mass index), 38 medical and pharmaceutical spending and utilization measures, and 3 employment outcomes (absenteeism, job tenure, and job performance).Conclusions and relevanceAmong employees of a large US warehouse retail company, a workplace wellness program resulted in significantly greater rates of some positive self-reported health behaviors among those exposed compared with employees who were not exposed, but there were no significant differences in clinical measures of health, health care spending and utilization, and employment outcomes after 18 months. Although limited by incomplete data on some outcomes, these findings may temper expectations about the financial return on investment that wellness programs can deliver in the short term.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03167658.

Project description:ImportanceMany employers use workplace wellness programs to improve employee health and reduce medical costs, but randomized evaluations of their efficacy are rare.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of a comprehensive workplace wellness program on employee health, health beliefs, and medical use after 12 and 24 months.Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized clinical trial of 4834 employees of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign was conducted from August 9, 2016, to April 26, 2018. Members of the treatment group (n = 3300) received incentives to participate in the workplace wellness program. Members of the control group (n = 1534) did not participate in the wellness program. Statistical analysis was performed on April 9, 2020.InterventionsThe 2-year workplace wellness program included financial incentives and paid time off for annual on-site biometric screenings, annual health risk assessments, and ongoing wellness activities (eg, physical activity, smoking cessation, and disease management).Main outcomes and measuresMeasures taken at 12 and 24 months included clinician-collected biometrics (16 outcomes), administrative claims related to medical diagnoses (diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia) and medical use (office visits, inpatient visits, and emergency department visits), and self-reported health behaviors and health beliefs (14 outcomes).ResultsAmong the 4834 participants (2770 women; mean [SD] age, 43.9 [11.3] years), no significant effects of the program on biometrics, medical diagnoses, or medical use were seen after 12 or 24 months. A significantly higher proportion of employees in the treatment group than in the control group reported having a primary care physician after 24 months (1106 of 1200 [92.2%] vs 477 of 554 [86.1%]; adjusted P = .002). The intervention significantly improved a set of employee health beliefs on average: participant beliefs about their chance of having a body mass index greater than 30, high cholesterol, high blood pressure, and impaired glucose level jointly decreased by 0.07 SDs (95% CI, -0.12 to -0.01 SDs; P = .02); however, effects on individual belief measures were not significant.Conclusions and relevanceThis randomized clinical trial showed that a comprehensive workplace wellness program had no significant effects on measured physical health outcomes, rates of medical diagnoses, or the use of health care services after 24 months, but it increased the proportion of employees reporting that they have a primary care physician and improved employee beliefs about their own health.Trial registrationAmerican Economic Association Randomized Controlled Trial Registry number: AEARCTR-0001368.

Project description:BackgroundWorkplace health programs (WHPs) may improve adult health but very little evidence exists on multi-level WHPs implemented at-scale and so the relationship between program implementation factors and outcomes of WHPs are poorly understood. This study evaluated Get Healthy at Work (GHaW), a state-wide government-funded WHP in Australia.MethodsA mixed-method design included a longitudinal quasi-experimental survey of businesses registered with GHaW and a comparison group of businesses surveyed over a 12-month period. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with key contacts and employees of selected intervention group businesses and the service providers of the program were conducted to assess program adoption and adaptation.ResultsPositive business-level changes in workplace culture were observed over time among GHaW businesses compared with the control group. Multilevel regression modelling revealed perceptions that employees were generally healthy (p = 0.045 timeXgroup effect) and that the workplace promoted healthy behaviours (p = 0.004 timeXgroup effect) improved significantly while the control group reported no change in work culture perceptions. Changes in perceptions about work productivity were not observed; however only one third of businesses registered for the program had adopted GHaW during the evaluation period. Qualitative results revealed a number of factors contributing to program adoption: which depended on program delivery (e.g., logistics, technology and communication channels), design features of the program, and organisational factors (primarily business size and previous experience of WHPs).ConclusionsEvaluation of program factors is important to improve program delivery and uptake and to ensure greater scalability. GHaW has the potential to improve workplace health culture, which may lead to better health promoting work environments. These results imply that government can play a central role in enabling prioritisation and incentivising health promotion in the workplace.

Project description:BackgroundWorkplace Health Promotion Programs (WHPP) have been shown to be an efficient way of improving workers' health. These programs can be incorporated in the worker's daily schedule and improve their productivity at work. Improving employees' health also benefits the employers by increasing their return on investment and lowering healthcare costs. The Activate Your Health program, created by Capsana in 2015, is a WHPP targeting multiple lifestyle habits for a three-year period. This WHPP includes tailored web-based interventions and the support of different health professionals throughout the years. We hypothesize that this approach will yield long-term lifestyle changes. The objective of the current paper is to describe the Activate Your Health program's design.Methods/designEleven companies are taking part in this WHPP and had to choose among five different options of this program and all their employees were encouraged to participate. Each option differs by the number and type of interventions included. The limited option, which is considered the control group, only consists in completing a questionnaire regarding their health status, lifestyle habits and behaviors. On the other end, the extensive option receives a combination of multiple interventions: online menus, health challenges, support in creating a healthy work environment, coaching by health professionals (nurse, nutritionist, and kinesiologist), health screening and flexibility assessment, online resources, social health platform, and activity tracking. The remaining options are in between these options and vary by the amount of intervention. Baseline data are already gathered; two other data collection periods will take place after one and 2 years into the program. The primary outcomes of the current program are physical activity and fitness measures, nutritional data, smoking habits, stress and intention to change.DiscussionThe Activate Your Health program will allow us to compare which combinations of interventions are the most effective. It is expected that the extensive option will be the most advantageous to improve lifestyle habits. The results will indicate the strength and weakness of each intervention and how it could be improved.Trial registrationClinicaltrails.gov, registration number: NCT02933385 (updated on the 26th of March 2019, initially registered on the 5th of October 2016).

Project description:BackgroundThe workplace provides an ideal setting for health promotion, as adults spend most of their day at work. Middle managers hold a strategic position to lead workplace health promotion. This study evaluates the outcomes of an intensive intervention training middle managers to promote health in the workplace.MethodsA workshop was designed and conducted to train female middle management employees to construct, implement, and evaluate a health promotion program in their workplace. Semi-structured interviews were carried out post-intervention to assess workplace health promotion outcomes according to the RE-AIM framework, and identify variables contributing to success. Additionally, questionnaires were distributed pre and post-program assessing personal health and self-efficacy changes.ResultsEighteen participants from 13 government offices, who serve 19,560 employees, completed the training course. Nine workplaces had workplace health promotion programs in progress 12 months after the course had ended, of which 8 made health promotion changes in organizational policy. Workplace RE-AIM scores showed that 8 workplaces were high or partial performers, and 5 were low or non-performers. Factors that increased the likelihood of successful interventions included management support, steering committee, comprehensive programming, conducting a needs assessment and flexibility in program implementation in the presence of challenges. Post course, participants reported increased health knowledge related to workplace health promotion (p < 0.001), and increased health promotion self-efficacy (p < 0.05).ConclusionsTraining and continued guidance of middle managers resulted in the design and successful implementation of workplace health promotion interventions. A RE-AIM based assessment was found to be an effective method for evaluating multi-content workplace health promotion programs. Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov , registration number: NCT03295136, registration date: 24/09/2017.

Dataset Information

Pathways to Employee Outcomes in a Workplace Health Promotion Program.

Purpose

Design

Setting

Sample

Measures

Analysis

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Pathways to Employee Outcomes in a Workplace Health Promotion Program.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets