Barriers and facilitators to participation in workplace health promotion (WHP) activities: results from a cross‐sectional survey of public‐sector employees in Tasmania, Australia

Abstract

Issue addressed Workplaces are promising settings for health promotion, yet employee participation in workplace health promotion (WHP) activities is often low or variable. This study explored facilitating factors and barriers associated with participation in WHP activities that formed part of a comprehensive WHP initiative run within the Tasmanian State Service (TSS) between 2009 and 2013. Methods TSS employee (n=3228) completed surveys in 2013. Data included sociodemographic characteristics, employee-perceived availability of WHP activities, employee-reported participation in WHP activities, and facilitators and barriers to participation. Ordinal log-link regression was used in cross-sectional analyses. Results Significant associations were found for all facilitating factors and participation. Respondents who felt their organisation placed a high priority on WHP, who believed that management supported participation or that the activities could improve their health were more likely to participate. Time- and health-related barriers were associated with participation in fewer activities. All associations were independent of age, sex, work schedule and employee-perceived availability of programs. Part-time and shift-work patterns, and location of activities were additionally identified barriers. Conclusion Facilitating factors relating to implementation, peer and environmental support, were associated with participation in more types of activities, time- and health-related barriers were associated with less participation. So what? Large and diverse organisations should ensure WHP efforts have manager support and adopt flexible approaches to maximise employee engagement.

Feasibility and Process Evaluation of a Need-Supportive Physical Activity Program in Aged Care Workers: The Activity for Well-Being Project

“…The most common reasons for participating in the pilot of the Activity for Well-Being program were related to a desire to improve health, while the most common reason for not participating was related to time constraints. These findings are consistent with previous studies such as the Step It Up Challenge, a workplace physical activity intervention in New Zealand, that reported the most prevalent reasons for participating in the program were associated with a desire to improve health and fitness (Davey et al, 2009); and the Healthy@Work program, a Tasmanian study that found timeand health-related factors were associated with lower levels of participation (Kilpatrick et al, 2017). Qualitative and survey data from the current project indicated that the actual modes of recruitment used (i.e., emails, flyers, and presentations at team meetings) were appropriate; however, there was a need for more promotion through multiple sources, including promotion over a longer period of time and better education around the nature of the program, particularly in residential settings.…”

“…An Austrian study by Nöhammer et al (2010) noted that having easy and regular access to information and being personally notified may increase employee participation in workplace health promotion. Other studies have shown that perceived management support for such programs contributes to employee participation (Sloan and Gruman, 1988;Kilpatrick et al, 2017). Similarly, management support has previously been identified as impacting the implementation process for worksite health promotion programs (Wierenga et al, 2013).…”

“…Barriers to adherence for program participants were found to be similar to those identified in the pre-program interviews (Lock et al, 2018), with the most prominent barrier being time constraints. Time constraints have long been established as one of the most prevalent barriers to regular physical activity participation in adults in both by cross-sectional and experimental studies (Booth et al, 1997;Trost et al, 2002;Mailey et al, 2014;Kilpatrick et al, 2017). One barrier that was specific to the Activity for Well-Being program was the issue of participants not wanting to inconvenience the supporting AEP, despite the scheduled follow-ups from the AEP during the active intervention period and the emphasis that participants could approach the AEP for any support at any stage throughout the intervention and follow-up.…”

Women in the Workplace: Promoting Healthy Lifestyles and Mitigating Weight Gain during the Preconception, Pregnancy, and Postpartum Periods

“…As mentioned, there are no published studies focusing on the workplace barriers to lifestyle change specific to preconception, pregnant, and postpartum working women. However, general barriers include: heavy workloads, health promotion activity scheduling and location, work patterns such as part-time work or shift work, workplace location, limited availability of healthy lifestyle activities [28], and unsupportive management [29]. Additional obstacles impacting pregnant and postpartum women underscore the importance of tailored health promotion for this population, including health concerns such as gestational diabetes or morning sickness; short interconception periods, which may not be long enough to return to a healthy weight; and children's health problems [30].…”

Creating a Culture of Health in Planning and Implementing Innovative Strategies Addressing Non-communicable Chronic Diseases

“…However, there are barriers that must be overcome in order to establish a successful industry/academia/community collaboration (Kilpatrick et al, 2017).…”