Nutrition at the worksite: An overview

Glanz, Karen; Seewald-Klein, Terri

doi:10.1016/s0022-3182(86)80084-x

Cited by 50 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…98 However, detailed analyses of intervention components suggest equivocal success in changing lifestyle characteristics such as dietary habits or physical activity. 96,97,99 These uncertainties are mirrored in workplace preventive lifting programs (as opposed to ergonomic interventions): evident short-term benefits but problematic long-term adherence and benefits. [100][101][102][103] Program and behavioral sustainability are, therefore, major concerns.…”

Section: Health Decision-making and Participatory Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Conceptual Framework for Integrating Workplace Health Promotion and Occupational Ergonomics Programs

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SYNOPSISMusculoskeletal, cardiovascular, and mental health are all associated with the physical and psychosocial conditions of work, as well as with individual health behaviors. An integrated approach to workplace health-promotion programs should include attention to the work environment, especially in light of recent findings that work organization influences so-called lifestyle or health behaviors. Macroergonomics provides a framework to improve both physical and organizational features of work and, in the process, to empower individual workers. The Center for the Promotion of Health in the New England Workplace (CPH-NEW) is a research-to-practice effort examining the effectiveness of worksite programs that combine occupational safety and health-especially ergonomics-with health promotion, emphasizing the contribution of work organization to both. Two intervention studies are underway in three different sectors: health care, corrections, and manufacturing. Each study features participatory structures to facilitate employee input into health goal-setting, program design and development, and evaluation, with the goal of enhanced effectiveness and longer-term sustainability.

show abstract

Section: Health Decision-making and Participatory Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Conceptual Framework for Integrating Workplace Health Promotion and Occupational Ergonomics Programs

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[17][18][19] The evidence is more tentative in other areas of lifestyle change. [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] Health education in the workplace is growing rapidly, driven by the promise of providing several noneconomic,33,36-38 as well as economic benefits. '838-4 Some authors emphasize the need for cost benefit and cost effectiveness analyses in order to examine the cost-effectiveness of workplace health promotion.18S3740,4l145 Others point out the limitations to the existing literature.38,39,41…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of workplace health promotion on absenteeism and employment costs in a large industrial population.

Bertera¹

1990

Am J Public Health

175

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We evaluated the impact of a comprehensive workplace health promotion program on absences among full-time employees in a large, multi-location, diversified industrial company. A pretest-posttest control group design was used to study 41 intervention sites and 19 control sites with 29,315 and 14,573 hourly employees, respectively. Blue-collar employees at intervention sites experienced an 14.0 percent decline in disability days over two years versus a 5.8 percent decline at control sites. This resulted in a net IntroductionHealth education has significant potential for reducing risk factors. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] The effectiveness of workplace health promotion programs in reducing health risks has been demonstrated in the areas of high blood pressure control14-6 and smoking cessation. [17][18][19] The evidence is more tentative in other areas of lifestyle change. [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] Health education in the workplace is growing rapidly, driven by the promise of providing several noneconomic,33,36-38 as well as economic benefits.'838-4 Some authors emphasize the need for cost benefit and cost effectiveness analyses in order to examine the cost-effectiveness of workplace health promotion.18S3740,4l145 Others point out the limitations to the existing literature.38,39,41The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a comprehensive workplace health promotion program on illness absences not related to occupational causes.

show abstract

“…A major problem arises from the long time frame required to prove the link, thus allowing confounding variables to contaminate outcomes (see for example, Nicholson et al 1993). Glanz & Seewald-Klein (1986) in the US found there was little evidence of strong links between nutrition education and the outcome measure of productivity, even though she confirmed the link theoretically. Webb et al (1988), argued that the economic and noneconomic benefits of investing in health promotion programmes by companies and governments have not yet been adequately determined.…”

Section: Litera Ture Revie Wmentioning

confidence: 96%

Promoting the health of construction workers

Uher

Ritchie

1998

Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present paper reports on research which attempted to ascertain the attitudes of the management and site personnel of general contractors and subcontractors on the issue of health promotion in the workplace. The main focus was on fitness and nutrition programmes, and the existence of a relationship between the health of employees and their productivity. The data were collected using questionnaires from a sample of eight large general contractors and 14 subcontractors operating in the Sydney region of the Australian construction industry. The responses in the sample were received from eight occupational health and safety (OHS) managers and 34 site workers employed by general contractors, and 14 site workers employed by subcontractors. The attitudes of the respondents toward health promotion in the workplace were found to be highly positive, and supportive of the development and implementation of health promotion programmes. In the opinion of the respondents, job performance and productivity may be increased through health promotion programmes in the workplace.

show abstract

Nutrition at the worksite: An overview

Cited by 50 publications

References 74 publications

A Conceptual Framework for Integrating Workplace Health Promotion and Occupational Ergonomics Programs

A Conceptual Framework for Integrating Workplace Health Promotion and Occupational Ergonomics Programs

The effects of workplace health promotion on absenteeism and employment costs in a large industrial population.

Promoting the health of construction workers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About