Worksite health promotion and social inequalities in health

Put, Anne C. van der; Mandemakers, Jornt J.; Wit, John de; Lippe, Tanja van der

doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2020.100543

Cited by 20 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore it often remains unclear whether employees with a low SEP profit from workplace health promotion programs. A recent study including cross-sectional data from nine European countries showed that participation in workplace health promotion programs is associated with a better self-perceived health in employees with a low SEP, if such programs consisted of a health check ( van der Put et al, 2020 ). However, considering the cross-sectional character of the study, more research is needed to understand the causal relationship between workplace health promotion programs and self-perceived health of employees with a low SEP.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effectiveness of workplace health promotion programs on self-perceived health of employees with a low socioeconomic position: An individual participant data meta-analysis

Heijster

Boot

Robroek

et al. 2021

SSM - Population Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the current study was to evaluate whether workplace health promotion programs improve self-perceived health of employees with a low socioeconomic position (SEP), and whether differential effects exist between individuals with a low SEP for gender, marital status or age. Individual participant data from six Dutch intervention studies aiming at promoting healthy behavior and preventing obesity in the work setting, with a total of 1906 participants, were used. The overall intervention effect and interaction effects for gender, marital status and age were evaluated using two-stage meta-analyses with linear mixed regression models. In the first stage effect sizes of each study were estimated, which were pooled in the second stage. Compared to control conditions, workplace health promotion programs did not show an overall improvement in self-perceived health of employees with a low SEP (β0.03 (95%CI: −0.03 to 0.09)). Effects did not differ across gender, marital status and age. Future research could be focused on the determinants of self-perceived health next to health behavior to improve the health of employees with a low SEP.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effectiveness of workplace health promotion programs on self-perceived health of employees with a low socioeconomic position: An individual participant data meta-analysis

Heijster

Boot

Robroek

et al. 2021

SSM - Population Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, the findings are applicable for high SES individuals. More and carefully designed research is needed for lower SES populations (Côté et al , 2020; van Heijster et al , 2021) who may even profit more from WHP interventions (van de Ven et al , 2020; van der Put et al , 2020), but require more encouragement to participate (van der Put et al , 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing attractive workplace health promotion programs

Nöhammer

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeWorkplace health promotion (WHP) is an investment in human capital that can lead to substantial organizational and individual benefit. However, this depends on high participation rates, which are rarely reached. The aim of this article thus is to examine necessary conditions for WHP success by analyzing employee perceived determinants of participation.Design/methodology/approachBased on a qualitative study, a questionnaire was designed. The determinants of participation were assessed regarding underlying categories and importance via factor analysis.FindingsPersonal benefit, social aspects, information, uncomplicated use, security and autonomy plus time and participation in offer design emerged as relevant factors. For the population studied, uncomplicated use, personal benefit and information were rated as most important.Originality/valueThe study is based on determinants voiced by the workforce only, not expert-rated aspects. Moreover, it was carried out in small and medium-sized organizations, which are understudied regarding WHP. By reducing data using factor analysis, a basis for further research is created. Also, a basic questionnaire is suggested via the items employed that can help organizations to investigate the WHP-related wishes and needs that matter most to the workforce.

show abstract

“…Health Promotion encourages people to avoid lifestyles that are harmful to health, including smoking, alcohol consumption and substance abuse. Aside from the above-mentioned avoidance preventive behavior, van der Put [ 19 ] and Mulderij [ 20 , 21 ] also comprise physical and fitness activities, family planning, mental health, education, community and other related behaviors relating to health promotion. Although health promotion-related behaviors do not necessarily mean that individuals have a healthy lifestyle, it is an indispensable factor in developing a healthier lifestyle.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Success factors of health promotion: Evaluation by DEMATEL and M-DEMATEL methods — A case study in a non-profit organization

Liao

Bercea

2021

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proper health knowledge and adequate motivation for health activities are key factors that influence an individual to adopt a healthy behavior. Health promotion positively influences progressive behaviors that seek to advance health potential, to continuously improve one’s lifestyle. There are many health promotion indications constantly encouraging people to eat healthier food. Based on the successful experience of a non-profit organization promoting a healthier vegetarian diet, this research identifies the operating factors that lead to the success of health promotion. The formulation and implementation of the health promotion strategy must be combined with the key success factors in order to accomplish the objectives. This study assessed seven factors, evaluated using the proposed method. The proposed Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method constructs the cause and effect model of health promotion, and places forward suggestions and strategies for improvement based on the evaluation of the results. This research compared the original DEMATEL with a Modified DEMATEL (M-DEMATEL) to identify the success factors of health promotion. According to the results of both methods, “leadership”, “communication channel” and “budget” are the most important and influential factors when promoting healthy diets. The results have shown the connection and the difference between the two methods. The main purpose of this research is not to determine which method is the best method, instead, to derive the combined effect of both methods.

show abstract

Worksite health promotion and social inequalities in health

Cited by 20 publications

References 55 publications

The effectiveness of workplace health promotion programs on self-perceived health of employees with a low socioeconomic position: An individual participant data meta-analysis

The effectiveness of workplace health promotion programs on self-perceived health of employees with a low socioeconomic position: An individual participant data meta-analysis

Designing attractive workplace health promotion programs

Success factors of health promotion: Evaluation by DEMATEL and M-DEMATEL methods — A case study in a non-profit organization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About