Literature DB >> 33419033

Organizational and Individual Outcomes of Health Promotion Strategies-A Review of Empirical Research.

Agata Basińska-Zych1, Agnieszka Springer1.   

Abstract

The main purpose of the paper is to identify the outcomes for employers and employees indicated in research related to workplace health promotion interventions (WHPIs). We investigated what methods are used and what types of organization this type of research is most often carried out in. In addition, the authors attempted to assess to what extent the methods used in the previous research prove the effectiveness of the implemented WHPIs. A systematic review of English-language papers (2000-2020) focused on types of health-promoting interventions in the workplace, and outcomes for employers and employees were conducted using the SCOPUS database (n = 260). As a result, 29 texts qualified for a final qualitative synthesis of the results. The analyses were most frequently conducted in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) based on both quantitative and qualitative methods. In order to draw conclusions, analyses were made by classifying the research presented in the texts according to the type of intervention implemented, classifying the outcomes identified, and indicating the type of evaluation made by the researcher. The analysis showed that most of the outcomes presented refer to changes in the strategy and organizational culture, as well as the behavior of employees. In 18 studies, the indication of outcomes resulted directly from the evaluation outcomes. In other cases, the outcomes were identified by an evaluation of the process or structure of WHPI. The conducted analysis showed significant diversity in terms of the outcomes measured and the research methods used. The quasi-experimental methods, randomly controlled cluster trials, or cross-sectorial studies used in the study to confirm the effectiveness of WHPI were used only in every third study. In these studies, measurements were usually performed twice: at baseline and after intervention. The majority of studies confirmed that WHPIs led to a positive change in the healthy behavior of employees and effected an organizational change, and more rarely led to savings or a reduction in costs resulting from sickness absenteeism, presentism, turnover, etc., and return on investment (ROI). The article shows the need to conduct further research towards the development of guidelines for the evaluation of the effectiveness of implemented programs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  effectiveness evaluation; enterprises; health promotion; health promotion management; intervention; organizational strategies; outcomes; wellbeing; workers’ health; workplace

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33419033      PMCID: PMC7825322          DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18020383

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health        ISSN: 1660-4601            Impact factor:   3.390


  51 in total

1.  The Behavior Change Consortium: setting the stage for a new century of health behavior-change research.

Authors:  M G Ory; P J Jordan; T Bazzarre
Journal:  Health Educ Res       Date:  2002-10

Review 2.  Well-being at work--overview and perspective.

Authors:  Paul Schulte; Harri Vainio
Journal:  Scand J Work Environ Health       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 5.024

Review 3.  A systematic review of selected interventions for worksite health promotion. The assessment of health risks with feedback.

Authors:  Robin E Soler; Kimberly D Leeks; Sima Razi; David P Hopkins; Matt Griffith; Adam Aten; Sajal K Chattopadhyay; Susan C Smith; Nancy Habarta; Ron Z Goetzel; Nicolaas P Pronk; Dennis E Richling; Deborah R Bauer; Leigh Ramsey Buchanan; Curtis S Florence; Lisa Koonin; Debbie MacLean; Abby Rosenthal; Dyann Matson Koffman; James V Grizzell; Andrew M Walker
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 5.043

4.  [Application of job demands-resources model in research on relationships between job satisfaction, job resources, individual resources and job demands].

Authors:  Adrianna Potocka; Małgorzata Waszkowska
Journal:  Med Pr       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 0.760

5.  Recent experience in health promotion at Johnson & Johnson: lower health spending, strong return on investment.

Authors:  Rachel M Henke; Ron Z Goetzel; Janice McHugh; Fik Isaac
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 6.301

6.  Health promotion for the aging workforce in Poland.

Authors:  Nicola Magnavita; Piotr Sakowski; Ilaria Capitanelli; Daniele Ignazio La Milia; Umberto Moscato; Andrea Poscia; Walter Ricciardi
Journal:  Int J Occup Med Environ Health       Date:  2018-08-03       Impact factor: 1.843

7.  Change in lifestyle through health promotion program without face-to-face intervention in a large-scale Japanese enterprise.

Authors:  Yasuo Haruyama; Hiroshi Fukuda; Tomoe Arai; Takashi Muto
Journal:  J Occup Health       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 2.708

8.  Association between perceived inadequate staffing and musculoskeletal pain among hospital patient care workers.

Authors:  Seung-Sup Kim; Cassandra A Okechukwu; Jack T Dennerlein; Leslie I Boden; Karen Hopcia; Dean M Hashimoto; Glorian Sorensen
Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health       Date:  2013-03-12       Impact factor: 3.015

9.  Results of a pilot intervention to improve health and safety for health care workers.

Authors:  Caitlin Eicher Caspi; Jack T Dennerlein; Christopher Kenwood; Anne M Stoddard; Karen Hopcia; Dean Hashimoto; Glorian Sorensen
Journal:  J Occup Environ Med       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.162

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.