Improving Low-Wage, Midsized Employers' Health Promotion Practices

Hannon, Peggy A.; Harris, Jeffrey R.; Sopher, Carrie J.; Kuniyuki, Alan; Ghosh, Donetta L.; Henderson, Shelly L.; Martin, Diane P.; Weaver, Marcia R.; Williams, Barbara; Albano, Denise; Meischke, Hendrika; Diehr, Paula; Lichiello, Patricia; Hammerback, Kristen; Parks, Malcolm R.; Forehand, Mark R.

doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2012.04.014

Cited by 23 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An initial pilot study of Workplace Solutions with eight large employers showed significant improvements in implementation one year after the intervention (34). However, when Workplace Solutions was tested in a randomized controlled trial with smaller employers, it was not effective in increasing overall implementation, though policies and communications did improve (31). A modified version of Workplace Solutions, which provided more on-site assistance and technical support, was pilot-tested with smaller employers and showed significant improvements in implementation (41); it will soon be tested with a randomized controlled trial.…”

Section: Dissemination and Implementation Research Aimed At Scale-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health Promotion in Smaller Workplaces in the United States

Harris

Hannon

Beresford

et al. 2014

Annu. Rev. Public Health

Self Cite

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most American workplaces are smaller, with fewer than 1,000 employees. Many of these employees are low-wage earners and at increased risk for chronic diseases. Owing to the challenges smaller workplaces face to offering health-promotion programs, their employees often lack access to healthpromotion opportunities available at larger workplaces. Many smaller employers do not offer health insurance, which is currently the major funding vehicle for health-promotion services. They also have few health-promotion vendors to serve them and low internal capacity for, and commitment to, delivery of on-site programs. The programs they offer, whether aimed at health promotion alone or integrated with health protection, are rarely comprehensive and are understudied. Research priorities for health promotion in smaller workplaces include developing programs feasible for the smallest workplaces with fewer than 20 employees. Policy priorities include incentives for smaller workplaces to implement comprehensive programs and an ongoing system for monitoring and evaluation.

show abstract

Section: Dissemination and Implementation Research Aimed At Scale-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health Promotion in Smaller Workplaces in the United States

Harris

Hannon

Beresford

et al. 2014

Annu. Rev. Public Health

Self Cite

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…14,15 This is one of the few national studies to demonstrate that with training, support, and guidance, a sizable number of smaller employers can adopt more comprehensive worksite health promotion programs in a relatively short period of time. The NHWP process began by increasing employers’ knowledge about each step in creating a new comprehensive workplace health promotion program.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Lang

Cluff

Payne³

et al. 2017

Journal of Occupational &Amp; Environmental Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To evaluate employers’ implementation of evidence-based interventions, and changes in employees’ behaviors associated with participating in the national healthy worksite program (NHWP). Methods NHWP recruited 100 small and mid-sized employers and provided training and support for 18 months. Outcome measures were collected with an employer questionnaire, an employee survey, and biometric data at baseline and 18 months later. Results The 41 employers who completed the NHWP implemented significantly more evidence-based interventions and had more comprehensive worksite health promotion programs after participating. Employees made significant improvements in physical activity and nutritional behaviors, but did not significantly improve employee weight. Conclusions Training and technical support can help small and mid-sized employers implement evidence-based health interventions to promote positive employee behavior changes. A longer follow up period may be needed to assess whether NHWP led to improvements in clinical outcomes.

show abstract

“…Our past research suggests that relatively few employers in this group have the capacity to adopt and implement best practices using only self-directed tools. 12,21,24 HealthLinks gives employers tools and resources they can use on their own, but also provides on-site and free technical assistance. The HealthLinks + intervention adds tools and technical assistance in building a worksite’s wellness committee, with the aim of increasing worksite capacity for health promotion and creating champions for health promotion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Initial power calculations for this study estimated a final sample size of 75 companies (25 in each arm) would be needed to have 80% power to identify a 10 percentage point difference in total best practice score between the HealthLinks group and the delayed control group and a 15 percentage point difference between the HealthLinks+ group and the delayed control group at a 5% significance level. The calculation was based on an assumption that the proportion of best practices for the delayed control group has mean 0.3 with standard deviation 0.2 (based on our previous studies with similar interventions 21–23 ). A post-hoc power calculation was performed based on the baseline data as shown in Table 3, which reveals that the study has 80% power to detect a smaller difference of 4 percentage points between the HealthLinks group and the delayed control group and a 8 percentage point difference between the HealthLinks+ group and the delayed control group.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

HealthLinks randomized controlled trial: Design and baseline results

Hannon

Hammerback

Allen

et al. 2016

Contemporary Clinical Trials

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Small employers, especially those in low-wage industries, frequently lack the capacity and resources to implement evidence-based health promotion interventions without support and assistance. The purpose of this paper is to (a) describe the intervention design and study protocol of the HealthLinks Trial and (b) report baseline findings. This study is a three-arm randomized controlled trial testing the impact of the HealthLinks intervention on worksites’ adoption and implementation of evidence-based interventions. Group 1 will receive HealthLinks, Group 2 will receive HealthLinks plus wellness committees, and Group 3 will be a delayed control group. Seventy-eight employers are participating in the study; 3302 employees across the worksites participated in baseline data collection. Employers and employees will participate in follow-up surveys at one and two years after baseline to measure implementation (one year) and maintenance (two years) of HealthLinks interventions. Study outcomes will determine whether HealthLinks is an effective approach to increasing evidence-based health promotion in small, low-wage worksites and whether wellness committees are a capacity-building tool that increases HealthLinks’ effectiveness.

show abstract

Improving Low-Wage, Midsized Employers' Health Promotion Practices

Cited by 23 publications

References 22 publications

Health Promotion in Smaller Workplaces in the United States

Health Promotion in Smaller Workplaces in the United States

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

HealthLinks randomized controlled trial: Design and baseline results

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About