| Literature DB >> 32899848 |
Marjolein Verburgh1, Petra Verdonk2, Yolande Appelman3, Monique Brood-van Zanten4,5, Karen Nieuwenhuijsen1.
Abstract
During menopause and midlife, female workers, particularly those in low-paid jobs, experience more occupational health problems than other groups of workers. Workplace interventions are often lacking, however. In the Netherlands, a workplace health promotion intervention-the work-life program (WLP)-has been developed to support female workers. Here, we tailored the WLP to the needs of female workers in low-paid jobs working at Amsterdam University Medical Center. In an exploratory mixed-methods study with a convergent design, among 56 participants, we used questionnaires before and after the intervention and semi-structured, in-depth interviews to address the following research question: What is the impact of the WLP on the women's health and work functioning? Our quantitative data showed that menopausal symptoms improved significantly after the WLP. Our qualitative data, derived from 12 participants, showed that the WLP initiated a process of mental empowerment that initiated positive changes in four domains: behavior, physical health, mental wellbeing, and in the workplace. Taken with caution, our findings suggest that the WLP mentally empowers female workers to make choices that enhance their health and wellbeing, both at work and in their private lives, as summarized in the quote of one participant: "I get that spirit in me!".Entities:
Keywords: intervention; low-paid jobs; menopause; midlife; women; work; workplace health promotion
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32899848 PMCID: PMC7558098 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17186462
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Work–life program.
Topic list semi-structured, in-depth interviews.
|
|
|
|
| Tell me whether you experienced any changes in your body, exercise habits, or nutrition after following the work-life program (WLP). |
| Tell me what has changed. Tell me how this has changed. Tell me why nothing has changed. |
|
|
| Tell me how and if the WLP contributed to these changes. |
|
|
|
|
| Tell me whether you experienced any changes in your health – menopausal symptoms, physical- and mental health—after following the WLP. |
| Tell me what has changed. Tell me how this has changed. Tell me why nothing has changed. |
|
|
| Tell me how and if the WLP contributed to these changes. |
|
|
|
|
| Tell me whether you experienced any changes in your work after following the WLP. |
| Tell me whether you experienced any changes in your work-life balance after following the WLP. |
| Tell me what has changed. Tell me how this has changed. Tell me why nothing has changed. |
|
|
| Tell me how and if the WLP contributed to these changes. |
Participant characteristics (n = 70, including drop-outs).
| Descriptive |
| (%) | Mean | SD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 52.6 | 4.5 | ||
| Ethnicity | ||||
| Ethnic minority | 36 | (51.4%) | ||
| Ethnic majority (Dutch) | 34 | (48.6%) | ||
| Educational level | ||||
| Low | 29 | (41.4%) | ||
| Intermediate | 36 | (51.4%) | ||
| High | 5 | (7.1%) | ||
| Subjective social status (SSS) 1 | 4.7 | 1.5 | ||
| Living situation | ||||
| Alone | 11 | (15.7%) | ||
| With partner | 11 | (15.7%) | ||
| With partner and children | 32 | (45.7%) | ||
| No partner but with children | 15 | (21.4%) | ||
| Other | 1 | (1.4%) | ||
| Main wage earner | ||||
| Yes | 38 | (54.3%) | ||
| No, my partner | 24 | (34.3%) | ||
| Equal with partner | 8 | (11.4%) | ||
| Type of contract | ||||
| Full time | 22 | (31.4%) | ||
| Part time | 48 | (68.6%) | ||
| Informal care responsibilities | ||||
| Yes | 15 | (21.4%) | ||
| No | 55 | (78.6%) | ||
| Menopausal status 2 | ||||
| Pre-menopause | 4 | (7.1%) | ||
| Early peri-menopause | 3 | (5.4%) | ||
| Late peri-menopause | 3 | (5.4%) | ||
| Post-menopause | 38 | (67.9%) | ||
| Unknown | 8 | (14.3%) |
1 1 missing. 2 Menopause status is determined through t1 (n = 56).
Outcomes on pre-test–post-test, paired t-tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank test results, and effect sizes.
|
| T0 (Pre-Test) 3 |
| T1 (Post-Test) | Pre- and Post-Test | Effect Size | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | Median (IQR) | Mean (SD) | Median (IQR) | Mean Diff 4 |
| |||||
| Work functioning problems (0–100) (lower is better) | 65 | 21.1 (20.0) | 54 | 18.6 (16.0) | 0.791 | |||||
| Work performance | 70 | 00.0 (6.0) | 55 | 00.0 (6.0) | 0.556 | |||||
| Need for recovery after work 1 | 70 | 40.9 (55.0) | 55 | 36.4 (64.0) | 0.508 | |||||
| Quantity of work | 66 | 21.4 (19.88) | 54 | 20.8 (16.68) | 2.4 | 0.350 | ||||
| Capacity to work | 69 | 18.8 (27.0) | 55 | 19.6 (25.0) | 0.320 | |||||
| Menopausal symptoms (GCS) (0–63) (lower is better) | 70 | 18.0 (12.0) | 56 | 13.0 (11.0) | 0.000 | 0.39 (0.03, 0.74) | ||||
| Psychological | 70 | 8.5 (8.0) | 56 | 7.0 (7.0) | 0.010 | 0.30 (−0.05, 0.66) | ||||
| Anxiety | 70 | 4.8 (3.10) | 56 | 4.4 (2.73) | 0.5 | 0.099 | ||||
| Depression | 70 | 4.0 (4.0) | 56 | 3.0 (4.0) | 0.002 | 0.41 (0.05, 0.76) | ||||
| Somatic | 70 | 5.4 (3.04) | 56 | 4.3 (2.81) | 1.1 | 0.001 | 0.35 (−0.00, 0.71) | |||
| Vasomotor | 70 | 2.0 (3.0) | 56 | 2.0 (3.0) | 0.001 | 0.33 (−0.02, 0.68) | ||||
| Sexual dysfunction | 70 | 1.0 (1.0) | 56 | 0.0 (1.0) | 0.438 | |||||
| Quality of life (0–100) (higher is better) | ||||||||||
| Physically | 70 | 48.8 (15.0) | 56 | 50.1 (10.0) | 0.250 | |||||
| Mentally | 70 | 48.2 (10.37) | 56 | 48.7 (9.40) | −0.2 | 0.908 | ||||
| Work ability (0–10) (higher is better) | 70 | 7.0 (1.0) | 56 | 8.0 (1.0) | 0.072 | |||||
1 Primary outcome variable. 2 The n varies due to missing values on the outcomes. 3 The outcome measures vary depending on which test is used. 4 Mean differences based on complete data sample (t0 + t1). 5 Either t or z vary depending on which test is used.
Characteristics of interview participants (n = 12).
| Descriptive |
| (%) | Mean | SD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 53.4 | 4.2 | ||
| Ethnicity | ||||
| Ethnic minority 1 | 7 | (58.3%) | ||
| Ethnic majority (Dutch) | 5 | (41.7%) | ||
| Educational level | ||||
| Low | 4 | (33.3%) | ||
| Intermediate | 8 | (66.7%) | ||
| High | 0 | (0.0%) | ||
| Type of contract | ||||
| Full time | 6 | (50.0%) | ||
| Part time | 6 | (50.0%) | ||
| Living situation | ||||
| Alone | 2 | (16.7%) | ||
| With partner | 3 | (25.0%) | ||
| With partner and children | 6 | (50.0%) | ||
| No partner but with children | 1 | (8.3%) | ||
| Menopausal status | ||||
| Pre-menopause | 1 | (8.3%) | ||
| Early peri-menopause | 1 | (8.3%) | ||
| Late peri-menopause | 0 | (0.0%) | ||
| Post-menopause | 9 | (75.0%) | ||
| Unknown | 1 | (8.3%) |
1 Ethnic backgrounds included Brazil, Guinee, Morocco, Portugal, and Surinam. The quote “I get that spirit in me” is from a participant from Ghana with whom the first author held a pilot group interview before the twelve interviews included in this article.