The impact of digital health interventions on health-related outcomes in the workplace: A systematic review

Abstract

BackgroundThe impact of employee health on productivity in the workplace is generally evidenced through absenteeism and presenteeism. Multicomponent worksite health programmes, with significant online elements, have gained in popularity over the last two decades, due in part to their scalability and low cost of implementation. However, little is known about the impact of digital-only interventions on health-related outcomes in employee groups. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the impact of pure digital health interventions in the workplace on health-related outcomes.MethodsMultiple databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed and PsycINFO, were used to review the literature using PRISMA guidelines.ResultsOf 1345 records screened, 22 randomized controlled trial studies were found to be eligible. Although there was a high level of heterogeneity across these studies, significant improvements were found for a broad range of outcomes such as sleep, mental health, sedentary behaviours and physical activity levels. Standardized measures were not always used to quantify intervention impact. All but one study resulted in at least one significantly improved health-related outcome, but attrition rates ranged widely, suggesting sustaining engagement was an issue. Risk of bias assessment was low for one-third of the studies and unclear for the remaining ones.ConclusionsThis review found modest evidence that digital-only interventions have a positive impact on health-related outcomes in the workplace. High heterogeneity impacted the ability to confirm what interventions might work best for which health outcomes, although less complex health outcomes appeared to be more likely to be impacted. A focus on engagement along with the use of standardized measures and reporting of active intervention components would be helpful in future evaluations.

Effects of a Workplace-Based Virtual-Run Intervention Among University Employees

“…Overall, the attrition prevalence was 54.37% (56/103). The attrition prevalence of our study is comparable with that of other digital health interventions in workplaces (range, 0% to 60%; median, 21%) [23]. This intervention offered some components for which barriers had to be overcome by employees (e.g., using an online platform, offering objective PA measurement), and another approach, such as offering incentives, might improve the retention of study participants [24].…”

The use of information and communication technologies to promote healthy lifestyle behaviour: a systematic scoping review

“…One of the main study aims was to determine the effect of proactive dissemination strategy on the reach of the internet-delivered computer-tailored intervention42; study duration commenced with the invitation to participate in the study. Sample sizes of the included research articles ranged from 26 to 16 948; sample sizes of the included evidence review articles ranged from 11 to 457 47. Twelve studies focused on males and females,20 36–42 44–46 48 one reported on females alone,18 one reported on all study population,49 one reported on employees50 and nine studies (systematic review) did not report study population 17 27 47 51–56.…”

“…Sample sizes of the included research articles ranged from 26 to 16 948; sample sizes of the included evidence review articles ranged from 11 to 457 47. Twelve studies focused on males and females,20 36–42 44–46 48 one reported on females alone,18 one reported on all study population,49 one reported on employees50 and nine studies (systematic review) did not report study population 17 27 47 51–56. Seven of the studies reviewed were conducted in the community 39 41 44–46 48 56.…”

The Physical Activity Wearables in the Police Force (PAW-Force) study:Acceptability and impact 

“…Evidence relating to the impact of digital interventions on wider health and wellbeing outcomes and productivity in a workplace setting is extremely limited (16,53). Although the present study found a lack of quantitative evidence for an impact on such outcomes (with the exception of a small improvement in mental health-related quality of life), the interviews were informative in that they elucidated a number of potential bene ts that should be explored in future studies.…”