OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a draft occupational health practice guideline aimed at preventing weight gain on employees' physical activity, sedentary behaviour and dietary behaviour and on body weight-related outcomes. METHODS: A randomised controlled trial was performed comparing guideline-based care to usual care among 16 occupational physicians and 523 employees in the Netherlands between 2009 and 2011. Occupational physicians in the intervention group followed the draft guideline by providing advice to employers on how to assess and intervene on the obesogenic work environment and conducted five face-to-face behavioural change counselling sessions with employees to improve their lifestyle. Data of employees were collected by questionnaire and physical measurements at baseline and 6-months follow-up. Linear and logistic regression analyses were performed to determine effects. RESULTS: The intervention showed significant effects on sedentary behaviour at work (β -28 min/day, 95% CI -2 to -54) and on fruit intake (β 2.1 pieces/week; 95% CI 0.6 to 3.6). No significant intervention effects were found for physical activity, sedentary behaviour in leisure time or during weekend days, snack intake and body weight-related outcomes. CONCLUSION: Guideline-based care resulted in a more favourable sedentary behaviour at work and increased fruit intake but did not improve employees' physical activity, snack intake or body weight-related outcomes. Trial registration number ISRCTN/73545254 and NTR/1190.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a draft occupational health practice guideline aimed at preventing weight gain on employees' physical activity, sedentary behaviour and dietary behaviour and on body weight-related outcomes. METHODS: A randomised controlled trial was performed comparing guideline-based care to usual care among 16 occupational physicians and 523 employees in the Netherlands between 2009 and 2011. Occupational physicians in the intervention group followed the draft guideline by providing advice to employers on how to assess and intervene on the obesogenic work environment and conducted five face-to-face behavioural change counselling sessions with employees to improve their lifestyle. Data of employees were collected by questionnaire and physical measurements at baseline and 6-months follow-up. Linear and logistic regression analyses were performed to determine effects. RESULTS: The intervention showed significant effects on sedentary behaviour at work (β -28 min/day, 95% CI -2 to -54) and on fruit intake (β 2.1 pieces/week; 95% CI 0.6 to 3.6). No significant intervention effects were found for physical activity, sedentary behaviour in leisure time or during weekend days, snack intake and body weight-related outcomes. CONCLUSION: Guideline-based care resulted in a more favourable sedentary behaviour at work and increased fruit intake but did not improve employees' physical activity, snack intake or body weight-related outcomes. Trial registration number ISRCTN/73545254 and NTR/1190.
Authors: Candace C Nelson; Gregory R Wagner; Alberto J Caban-Martinez; Orfeu M Buxton; Christopher T Kenwood; Erika L Sabbath; Dean M Hashimoto; Karen Hopcia; Jennifer Allen; Glorian Sorensen Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Luke Wolfenden; Sharni Goldman; Fiona G Stacey; Alice Grady; Melanie Kingsland; Christopher M Williams; John Wiggers; Andrew Milat; Chris Rissel; Adrian Bauman; Margaret M Farrell; France Légaré; Ali Ben Charif; Hervé Tchala Vignon Zomahoun; Rebecca K Hodder; Jannah Jones; Debbie Booth; Benjamin Parmenter; Tim Regan; Sze Lin Yoong Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-11-14
Authors: Lee Smith; Mark Hamer; Marcella Ucci; Alexi Marmot; Benjamin Gardner; Alexia Sawyer; Jane Wardle; Abigail Fisher Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-01-17 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Jantien van Berkel; Cécile R L Boot; Karin I Proper; Paulien M Bongers; Allard J van der Beek Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2014-01-27 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Debbie Wierenga; Luuk H Engbers; Pepijn Van Empelen; Saskia Duijts; Vincent H Hildebrandt; Willem Van Mechelen Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-12-17 Impact factor: 3.295