Jennifer K Coffeng1, Ingrid J M Hendriksen, Saskia F A Duijts, Jos W R Twisk, Willem van Mechelen, Cécile R L Boot. 1. From the Department of Public and Occupational Health (Mrs Coffeng and Drs Duijts, van Mechelen, and Boot), EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Body@Work TNO-VUmc (Mr Coffeng and Drs Hendriksen, van Mechelen, and Boot), Research Center Physical Activity, Work and Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; TNO (Expert Center Life Style) (Dr Hendriksen), Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics (Dr Twisk), VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; and Department of Health Sciences (Dr Twisk), VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of a combined social and physical environmental intervention as well as the effectiveness of both separate interventions. METHODS: In a 2 × 2 factorial design, 412 office employees were allocated to the combined social and physical environmental intervention, to the social environmental intervention only, to the physical environmental intervention only, or were part of the control group. Data on presenteeism, absenteeism, work performance, and work engagement were obtained with questionnaires at baseline, 6, and 12 months. Multilevel analyses were performed. RESULTS: The combined intervention showed a decrease in contextual performance and dedication. The social environmental intervention showed an improvement in task performance. The physical environmental intervention revealed an improvement in absorption. CONCLUSION: Although the study showed some promising results, it is not recommended to implement the current interventions.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of a combined social and physical environmental intervention as well as the effectiveness of both separate interventions. METHODS: In a 2 × 2 factorial design, 412 office employees were allocated to the combined social and physical environmental intervention, to the social environmental intervention only, to the physical environmental intervention only, or were part of the control group. Data on presenteeism, absenteeism, work performance, and work engagement were obtained with questionnaires at baseline, 6, and 12 months. Multilevel analyses were performed. RESULTS: The combined intervention showed a decrease in contextual performance and dedication. The social environmental intervention showed an improvement in task performance. The physical environmental intervention revealed an improvement in absorption. CONCLUSION: Although the study showed some promising results, it is not recommended to implement the current interventions.
Authors: Vasco F J Cumbe; Andrea N Pala; António J P Palha; Ana R P Gaio; Manuel F Esteves; Jair de Jesus Mari; Milton Wainberg Journal: Rev Psiquiatr Clin Date: 2017 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 0.909
Authors: Linda Koopmans; Jennifer K Coffeng; Claire M Bernaards; Cécile R L Boot; Vincent H Hildebrandt; Henrica C W de Vet; Allard J van der Beek Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2014-05-27 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Margriet A G Formanoy; Elise Dusseldorp; Jennifer K Coffeng; Iven Van Mechelen; Cecile R L Boot; Ingrid J M Hendriksen; Erwin C P M Tak Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-08-24 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Ingrid J M Hendriksen; Mirjam Snoijer; Brenda P H de Kok; Jeroen van Vilsteren; Hedwig Hofstetter Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: R A Kraaijeveld; F G Schaafsma; S M Ketelaar; C R L Boot; U Bültmann; J R Anema Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2016-03-12 Impact factor: 3.015