Faculty of Management, University of Primorska, 6000 Koper, Slovenia.
Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Primorska, 6310 Izola, Slovenia.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Feb 3;20(3):2757. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20032757.
Workplace health promotion programmes (WHPPs) are among the most important measures to improve the health and motivation of the ageing workforce. However, they are accompanied with certain challenges, such as low participation rates and higher participation levels of the more health-conscious workers, often failing to engage those who need such interventions the most. Following the PRISMA guidelines, this scoping review examined participation rates reported in articles on WHPPs to identify potential knowledge gaps. The results are worrying: participation rates are not only infrequently reported, but also low. Of the 58 articles, 37 report participation rates, with the majority (20) reporting an average participation rate of less than 50%. Reported participation rates refer either to different target groups, the type of intervention, or to single points in time, which makes it difficult to establish consistent criteria for comparison. We argue that despite the importance of WHPP efficacy, research focus should shift to the determinants of participation, as well as the issue of standardising the reporting of participation rates, alongside the potential problem of reporting bias.
工作场所健康促进计划(WHPPs)是改善老龄化劳动力健康和积极性的最重要措施之一。然而,它们伴随着某些挑战,例如参与率低,以及健康意识更强的工人的参与度更高,往往无法吸引最需要这些干预措施的人。本 scoping 综述遵循 PRISMA 指南,检查了 WHPP 文章中报告的参与率,以确定潜在的知识差距。结果令人担忧:参与率不仅报告得很少,而且很低。在 58 篇文章中,有 37 篇报告了参与率,其中大多数(20 篇)报告的平均参与率低于 50%。报告的参与率要么指不同的目标群体,要么指干预类型,要么指单一的时间点,这使得很难为比较建立一致的标准。我们认为,尽管 WHPP 功效很重要,但研究重点应该转移到参与的决定因素,以及参与率报告的标准化问题,以及报告偏差的潜在问题。