Skip to main content

Table 1 Participation levels and determinants of participation in educational or counselling worksite health promotion programmes

From: Determinants of participation in worksite health promotion programmes: a systematic review

Study Study
design
Study
population
Worksite health
promotion programme
Participation
level
Determinants
of participation
OR [95%CI]
Franklin 2006 [16] cohort Employees of an insurance company (n = 960) Daily e-mail messages
with links self-monitoring
on nutrition and physical
activity over 6 months.
40% (n = 388)
(n = 345 completed
baseline health survey)
male gender
age (30–49)
age (50+)
white ethnicity
married
income, $30.000–$59.999
income, > $59.999
0.34 [0.24–0.49]*
1.30 [0.72–2.33]
1.47 [0.79–2.74]
1.22 [0.78–1.93]
1.43 [1.08–1.91]*
1.50 [1.08–2.09]*
0.90 [0.58–1.41]
Thomas 2006
[20]
cohort Government employees
(n = 3500)
1 information session with goal
setting and subsequent
pedometer use and e-mail support
to increase physical activity
over 4 weeks.
34% (n = 1195)
(n = 927 provided
demographic information)
male gender
age (30–49)
age (50+)
0.46 [0.39–0.54]*
0.73 [0.60–0.89]*
0.82 [0.66–1.02]
McCarty 2005
[19]
cohort Employees of a health care system
(n = 6539)
Self-monitoring and weekly e-mail support
to increase physical activity and
a healthy diet over a 16-week period
17% (n = 1129) male gender 0.10 [0.08–0.14]*
Marshall 2003
[17]
RCT University employees
(n = 1409, results on
n = 800 responded to questionnaire)
8 week programme with printed (I1)
or website (I2) education
and 4 reinforcement moments
respectively by letter and e-mail.
46% (n = 655) male gender
age (yrs, mean)
intermediate or high education
married
BMI (kg/m2, mean)
good or excellent general health
full-time employment
academic job classification
0.77 [0.53–1.10]
Δ = 0 yrs; d = 0.00
0.70 [0.46–1.07]
1.15 [0.78–1.70]
Δ = 1 kg/m2; d = 0.14
0.69 [0.37–1.27]
0.69 [0.41–1.16]
0.79 [0.55–1.14]
Cornfeld 2002
[15]
cohort Employees and spouses of 6 companies
(n = 21396)
1-time health risk assessment
with personalized feedback
letters on cancer risk factors
21% (n = 4395) male gender
age (yrs, mean)
Caucasian ethnicity
1.16 [1.09–1.24]*
P: 44.8; all: 43.0
4.05 [3.52–4.67]*
Gold
2000
[21]
nonrandomized
controlled trial
Employees of 6 organizations from
the private and public sector
(n = 1741)
Education materials, followed by 6-monthly
telephone counselling sessions for 12 to 24
months on 7 risk areas (physical activity,
nutrition, weight, smoking, stress management,
back care, and cholesterol control)
35% (n = 607) male gender
age (yrs, mean)
# health risks (lifestyle areas, 0–13)
1.13 [0.93–1.38]
Δ = -1 yr
Δ = -0.34 health risks*
Blake
1996
[14]
cohort
community intervention trial
Employees in businesses participating
in the Minnesota Heart Health Program
intervention (n = 17626)
3 exercise competitions between
companies with recording the
type and minutes of daily exercise.
37% (n = 6495) male gender
company size, 45–500 employees
company size, > 500 employees
0.28 [0.26–0.31]*
0.22 [0.19–0.25]*
0.09 [0.08–0.10]*
Hooper 1995
[22]
cross-sectional University employees and spouses
(n = 338)
Self-monitoring to increase
physical activity over
a period of 20 weeks.
30% (n = 103) male gender
higher education
white ethnicity
married
full-time employment
faculty employees
1.20 [0.70–2.07]
1.06 [0.66–1.71]
1.18 [0.45–3.11]
0.91 [0.50–1.66]
1.86 [1.01–3.43]*
0.68 [0.40–1.13]
Baer
1993
[13]
Nonrandomized controlled trial Management-level male employees with
elevated total cholesterol levels
(n = 70)
An individual instruction,
every 3 months group meetings,
and monthly telephone support to
decrease cholesterol level.
47% (n = 33) age (yrs, mean)
aerobic activity (days/wk, mean)
cholesterol level > 6.17
weight (kg, mean)
% body fat (mean)
non smoker
Δ = 9 yrs*; d = 2.55
Δ = 0 days/wk; d = 0.00
14.3 [4.2–50.0]*
Δ = 1 kg; d = 0.39
Δ = 1%; d = 0.24
3.00 [0.56–16.03]
Mavis
1992
[18]
cross-sectional Stratified sample of university employees
(n = 110 invited, 81% response)
Health fair and health habit modification
programmes on exercise, weight control,
stress management and smoking cessation.
25% of respondents
(n = 22)
male gender
age (yrs, mean)
married/cohabiting
income above $30.000
faculty employees (vs clerical/support)
0.30 [0.11–0.83]*
Δ = 5.6*
1.89 [0.70–5.11]
0.62 [0.19–2.03]
0.11 [0.02–0.60]*