PURPOSE: There is limited documentation regarding the potential quality of life (QOL) benefits associated with use of a worksite wellness center. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the relationship between potential QOL change and use of a worksite wellness center during a 12-month period. DESIGN: Analysis of an annual QOL wellness center member survey and wellness center use during a 12-month time period. SETTING: A worksite wellness center. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1151 employee wellness center members, average age of 39.5 years, 69.7% female, and 43.5% reported being overweight. INTERVENTION: Members of the worksite wellness center have access to a range of fitness options, including exercise classes, water aerobics, an indoor track, strength training, and aerobic conditioning equipment. Additionally, nutritional classes are offered, and there is a wellness café. For resiliency, members can participate in wellness coaching or a stress-reduction group program. METHOD: Participants completed a baseline QOL survey and a second QOL survey 1 year later. An electronic entry system tracked use of the wellness center. RESULTS: Participants were divided into four wellness center use quartiles: low users (less than once every 2 weeks), below-average users, above-average users, and high users (two to three visits per week). High users reported experiencing improvements in their physical QOL (p < .0001) compared with the low users. Additionally, low users experienced a greater decline in their mental QOL (p = .05) compared with high users. CONCLUSION: In a large sample of employees, use of a wellness center during a 12-month period was associated with benefits for physical QOL. QOL is an important domain of wellness; therefore, in addition to measuring physiologic changes, examining potential QOL changes may be another important outcome measure for wellness centers.
PURPOSE: There is limited documentation regarding the potential quality of life (QOL) benefits associated with use of a worksite wellness center. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the relationship between potential QOL change and use of a worksite wellness center during a 12-month period. DESIGN: Analysis of an annual QOL wellness center member survey and wellness center use during a 12-month time period. SETTING: A worksite wellness center. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1151 employee wellness center members, average age of 39.5 years, 69.7% female, and 43.5% reported being overweight. INTERVENTION: Members of the worksite wellness center have access to a range of fitness options, including exercise classes, water aerobics, an indoor track, strength training, and aerobic conditioning equipment. Additionally, nutritional classes are offered, and there is a wellness café. For resiliency, members can participate in wellness coaching or a stress-reduction group program. METHOD:Participants completed a baseline QOL survey and a second QOL survey 1 year later. An electronic entry system tracked use of the wellness center. RESULTS:Participants were divided into four wellness center use quartiles: low users (less than once every 2 weeks), below-average users, above-average users, and high users (two to three visits per week). High users reported experiencing improvements in their physical QOL (p < .0001) compared with the low users. Additionally, low users experienced a greater decline in their mental QOL (p = .05) compared with high users. CONCLUSION: In a large sample of employees, use of a wellness center during a 12-month period was associated with benefits for physical QOL. QOL is an important domain of wellness; therefore, in addition to measuring physiologic changes, examining potential QOL changes may be another important outcome measure for wellness centers.
Authors: Matthew M Clark; Pamela J Atherton; Maria I Lapid; Sarah M Rausch; Marlene H Frost; Andrea L Cheville; Jean M Hanson; Yolanda I Garces; Paul D Brown; Jeff A Sloan; Jarrett W Richardson; Katherine M Piderman; Teresa A Rummans Journal: Am J Hosp Palliat Care Date: 2013-02-21 Impact factor: 2.500
Authors: Eleshia J Morrison; Paul J Novotny; Jeff A Sloan; Ping Yang; Christi A Patten; Kathryn J Ruddy; Matthew M Clark Journal: Clin Lung Cancer Date: 2017-03-02 Impact factor: 4.840
Authors: Jaskanwal D Sara; Megha Prasad; Mackram F Eleid; Ming Zhang; R Jay Widmer; Amir Lerman Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2018-04-27 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Christoph Höchsmann; James L Dorling; Corby K Martin; Conrad P Earnest; Timothy S Church Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2022-03-07 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: David T Eton; Timothy J Beebe; Philip T Hagen; Michele Y Halyard; Victor M Montori; James M Naessens; Jeff A Sloan; Carrie A Thompson; Douglas L Wood Journal: Patient Relat Outcome Meas Date: 2014-02-10
Authors: Ahmad Ali Eslami; Leili Rabiei; Seyed Mohammad Afzali; Saeed Hamidizadeh; Reza Masoudi Journal: Iran Red Crescent Med J Date: 2016-01-02 Impact factor: 0.611
Authors: Laura R Garcia-Rodriguez; Dominique L Sanchez; Alvin B Ko; Amy M Williams; Ed Peterson; Kathleen L Yaremchuk Journal: Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol Date: 2017-03-10