Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California (Ms Mulaney, Ms Bromley-Dulfano, Ms Singer, Ms McShane, Dr Singer); Vitality Health, London, UK and Institute of Economic Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic (Dr Stepanek); Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford, California (Dr Singer).
J Occup Environ Med. 2021 Sep 1;63(9):719-730. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000002219.
To explore sequential steps of employee engagement in wellness interventions and the impact of wellness interventions on employee health.
Using previously collected survey data from 23,667 UK employees, we tabulated intervention availability, awareness, participation, and associated health improvement and compared engagement by participation and risk status.
Employees' awareness of wellness interventions at their workplaces was often low (mean 43.3%, range 11.6%-82.3%). Participation was highest in diet/nutrition initiatives (94.2%) and lowest in alcohol counseling and smoking cessation interventions (2.1%). Employees with health risks were less likely than lower-risk employees to report awareness, participation, and health improvements from wellness interventions addressing the relevant health concern.
Employers and policymakers should consider variation in intervention engagement as they plan and implement wellness interventions. Engaging employee populations with higher health risks requires a more targeted approach.
探讨员工参与健康干预的顺序步骤以及健康干预对员工健康的影响。
利用之前从 23667 名英国员工收集的调查数据，我们列出了干预措施的可及性、知晓率、参与度以及相关的健康改善情况，并比较了参与度和风险状况。
员工对工作场所健康干预措施的知晓率往往较低（平均 43.3%，范围 11.6%-82.3%）。在饮食/营养计划方面的参与度最高（94.2%），而在酒精咨询和戒烟干预方面的参与度最低（2.1%）。有健康风险的员工比低风险员工更不可能报告与相关健康问题相关的健康干预措施的知晓率、参与度和健康改善情况。
雇主和政策制定者在计划和实施健康干预措施时应考虑干预措施的参与度差异。针对健康风险较高的员工群体，需要采取更有针对性的方法。
