Evaluation of Get Healthy at Work, a state-wide workplace health promotion program in Australia.

Crane, M; Bohn-Goldbaum, E; Lloyd, B; Rissel, C; Bauman, A; Indig, D; Khanal, S; Grunseit, A

Evaluation of Get Healthy at Work, a state-wide workplace health promotion program in Australia.

Crane, M Bohn-Goldbaum, E Lloyd, B Rissel, C Bauman, A Indig, D Khanal, S Grunseit, A

Permalink

Publisher:: BioMed Central
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: BMC Public Health, 2019, 19, (1), pp. 1-15
Issue Date:: 2019

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published versionAdobe PDF (913.76 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Crane, M
dc.contributor.author	Bohn-Goldbaum, E
dc.contributor.author	Lloyd, B
dc.contributor.author	Rissel, C
dc.contributor.author	Bauman, A
dc.contributor.author	Indig, D
dc.contributor.author	Khanal, S
dc.contributor.author	Grunseit, A https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0783-4596
dc.date.accessioned	2022-10-30T02:37:03Z
dc.date.available	2019-01-29
dc.date.available	2022-10-30T02:37:03Z
dc.date.issued	2019
dc.identifier.citation	BMC Public Health, 2019, 19, (1), pp. 1-15
dc.identifier.issn	1471-2458
dc.identifier.issn	1471-2458
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/162903
dc.description.abstract	Background Workplace health programs (WHPs) may improve adult health but very little evidence exists on multi-level WHPs implemented at-scale and so the relationship between program implementation factors and outcomes of WHPs are poorly understood. This study evaluated Get Healthy at Work (GHaW), a state-wide government-funded WHP in Australia. Methods A mixed-method design included a longitudinal quasi-experimental survey of businesses registered with GHaW and a comparison group of businesses surveyed over a 12-month period. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with key contacts and employees of selected intervention group businesses and the service providers of the program were conducted to assess program adoption and adaptation. Results Positive business-level changes in workplace culture were observed over time among GHaW businesses compared with the control group. Multilevel regression modelling revealed perceptions that employees were generally healthy (p = 0.045 timeXgroup effect) and that the workplace promoted healthy behaviours (p = 0.004 timeXgroup effect) improved significantly while the control group reported no change in work culture perceptions. Changes in perceptions about work productivity were not observed; however only one third of businesses registered for the program had adopted GHaW during the evaluation period. Qualitative results revealed a number of factors contributing to program adoption: which depended on program delivery (e.g., logistics, technology and communication channels), design features of the program, and organisational factors (primarily business size and previous experience of WHPs). Conclusions Evaluation of program factors is important to improve program delivery and uptake and to ensure greater scalability. GHaW has the potential to improve workplace health culture, which may lead to better health promoting work environments. These results imply that government can play a central role in enabling prioritisation and incentivising health promotion in the workplace.
dc.format	Electronic
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	BioMed Central
dc.relation.ispartof	BMC Public Health
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1186/s12889-019-6493-y
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject	1117 Public Health and Health Services
dc.subject.classification	Public Health
dc.subject.mesh	Adult
dc.subject.mesh	Australia
dc.subject.mesh	Health Behavior
dc.subject.mesh	Health Promotion
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Occupational Health
dc.subject.mesh	Occupational Health Services
dc.subject.mesh	Program Evaluation
dc.subject.mesh	Surveys and Questionnaires
dc.subject.mesh	Workplace
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Program Evaluation
dc.subject.mesh	Health Behavior
dc.subject.mesh	Adult
dc.subject.mesh	Occupational Health
dc.subject.mesh	Workplace
dc.subject.mesh	Health Promotion
dc.subject.mesh	Occupational Health Services
dc.subject.mesh	Australia
dc.subject.mesh	Surveys and Questionnaires
dc.title	Evaluation of Get Healthy at Work, a state-wide workplace health promotion program in Australia.
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	19
utslib.location.activity	England
utslib.for	1117 Public Health and Health Services
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/Public Health
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
pubs.consider-herdc	false
dc.date.updated	2022-10-30T02:37:01Z
pubs.issue	1
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	19
utslib.citation.issue	1

Abstract:

Background Workplace health programs (WHPs) may improve adult health but very little evidence exists on multi-level WHPs implemented at-scale and so the relationship between program implementation factors and outcomes of WHPs are poorly understood. This study evaluated Get Healthy at Work (GHaW), a state-wide government-funded WHP in Australia. Methods A mixed-method design included a longitudinal quasi-experimental survey of businesses registered with GHaW and a comparison group of businesses surveyed over a 12-month period. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with key contacts and employees of selected intervention group businesses and the service providers of the program were conducted to assess program adoption and adaptation. Results Positive business-level changes in workplace culture were observed over time among GHaW businesses compared with the control group. Multilevel regression modelling revealed perceptions that employees were generally healthy (p = 0.045 timeXgroup effect) and that the workplace promoted healthy behaviours (p = 0.004 timeXgroup effect) improved significantly while the control group reported no change in work culture perceptions. Changes in perceptions about work productivity were not observed; however only one third of businesses registered for the program had adopted GHaW during the evaluation period. Qualitative results revealed a number of factors contributing to program adoption: which depended on program delivery (e.g., logistics, technology and communication channels), design features of the program, and organisational factors (primarily business size and previous experience of WHPs). Conclusions Evaluation of program factors is important to improve program delivery and uptake and to ensure greater scalability. GHaW has the potential to improve workplace health culture, which may lead to better health promoting work environments. These results imply that government can play a central role in enabling prioritisation and incentivising health promotion in the workplace.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/162903