Suchergebnisse

Purpose: To provide a nationally representative snapshot of workplace health promotion (WHP) and protection practices among United States worksites. Design: Cross-sectional, self-report Workplace Health in America (WHA) Survey between November 2016 and September 2017. Setting: National. Participants: Random sample of US worksites with ≥10 employees, stratified by region, size, and North American Industrial Classification System sector. Measures: Workplace health promotion programs, program administration, evidence-based strategies, health screenings, disease management, incentives, work–life policies, implementation barriers, and occupational safety and health (OSH). Analysis: Descriptive statistics, t tests, and logistic regression. Results: Among eligible worksites, 10.1% (n = 3109) responded, 2843 retained in final sample, and 46.1% offered some type of WHP program. The proportion of comparable worksites with comprehensive programs (as defined in Healthy People 2010) rose from 6.9% in 2004 to 17.1% in 2017 ( P < .001). Occupational safety and health programs were more prevalent than WHP programs, and 83.5% of all worksites had an individual responsible for employee safety, while only 72.2% of those with a WHP program had an individual responsible for it. Smaller worksites were less likely than larger to offer most programs. Conclusion: The prevalence of WHP programs has increased but remains low across most health programs; few worksites have comprehensive programs. Smaller worksites have persistent deficits and require targeted approaches; integrated OSH and WHP efforts may help. Ongoing monitoring using the WHA Survey benchmarks OSH and WHP in US worksites, updates estimates from previous surveys, and identifies gaps in research and practice.

Purpose: To provide a nationally representative description on the prevalences of policies, practices, programs, and supports relating to worksite wellness in US hospitals. Design: Cross-sectional, self-report of hospitals participating in Workplace Health in America (WHA) survey from November 2016 through September 2017. Setting: Hospitals across the United States. Participants: Random sample of 338 eligible hospitals participating in the WHA survey. Measures: We used previous items from the 2004 National Worksite Health Promotion survey. Key measures included presence of Worksite Health Promotion programs, evidence-based strategies, health screenings, disease management programs, incentives, work-life policies, barriers to health promotion program implementation, and occupational safety and health. Analysis: Independent variables included hospital characteristics (eg, size). Dependent characteristics included worksite health promotion components. Descriptive statistics and χ2 analyses were used. Results: Eighty-two percent of hospitals offered a wellness programs during the previous year with larger hospitals more likely than smaller hospitals to offer programs ( P < .01). Among hospitals with wellness programs, 69% offered nutrition programs, 74% offered physical activity (PA) programs, and 84% had a policy to restrict all tobacco use. Among those with cafeterias or vending machines, 40% had a policy for healthier foods. Only 47% and 25% of hospitals offered lactation support or healthy sleep programs, respectively. Conclusion: Most hospitals offer wellness programs. However, there remain hospitals that do not offer wellness programs. Among those that have wellness programs, most offer supports for nutrition, PA, and tobacco control. Few hospitals offered programs on healthy sleep or lactation support.

Purpose: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) initiated the Work@Health Program to teach employers how to improve worker health using evidence-based strategies. Program goals included (1) determining the best way(s) to deliver employer training, (2) increasing employers' knowledge of workplace health promotion (WHP), and (3) increasing the number of evidence-based WHP interventions at employers' worksites. This study is one of the few to examine the effectiveness of a program designed to train employers how to implement WHP programs. Design: Pre- and posttest design. Setting: Training via 1 of 3 formats hands-on, online, or blended. Participants: Two hundred six individual participants from 173 employers of all sizes. Intervention: Eight-module training curriculum to guide participants through building an evidence-based WHP program, followed by 6 to 10 months of technical assistance. Measures: The CDC Worksite Health ScoreCard and knowledge, attitudes, and behavior survey. Analysis: Descriptive statistics, paired t tests, and mixed linear models. Results: Participants' posttraining mean knowledge scores were significantly greater than the pretraining scores (61.1 vs 53.2, P < .001). A year after training, employers had significantly increased the number of evidence-based interventions in place (47.7 vs 35.5, P < .001). Employers' improvements did not significantly differ among the 3 training delivery formats. Conclusion: The Work@Health Program provided employers with knowledge to implement WHP interventions. The training and technical assistance provided structure, practical guidance, and tools to assess needs and select, implement, and evaluate interventions.