Beurskens-Comuth Petra A W V, Norder Giny, van Rhenen Willem, de Rijk Angelique E, Houkes Inge
Knowledge Institute for Work and Health, Arbo Unie, Nevelgaarde 42, Nieuwegein, 3436 ZZ, The Netherlands.
Department of Social Medicine, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, 6200 MD, The Netherlands.
BMC Public Health. 2025 Jul 2;25(1):2227. doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-23417-5.
Lifestyle medicine has received increasing attention in recent decades, not only in general healthcare but also in occupational health. As part of prevention, Dutch occupational physicians are encouraged to provide lifestyle counselling and refer to lifestyle interventions, such as the Combined Lifestyle Intervention (CLI). However, we do not know to what extent occupational physicians and other occupational health professionals (OHPs) currently practise lifestyle counselling. This study aims to assess the current lifestyle counselling practices of Dutch OHPs and identify the determinants of these practices and of referrals to CLI in particular.
A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 266 OHPs from two large occupational health centres in the Netherlands. The survey consisted of items and scales based on the Assess, Advise, Agree, Assist, Arrange (5 A) framework for lifestyle counselling and the Attitude, Social norms, Self-efficacy (ASE) model. Data were analysed by means of descriptive statistics, correlational analyses and hierarchical regression analyses.
The majority of OHPs (70.3%) assessed their clients' current lifestyle, while 49.1% assessed their clients' motivation to change. 65% of OHPs would like to discuss or advise about lifestyle more often. Stress and physical activity were the most frequent topics covered in the advice for setting of goals (Agree). 59% of variance of lifestyle counselling practices was explained, with self-efficacy and attitude of the OHPs as the most important determinants. More time, training and tools are considered facilitators for lifestyle counselling. Regarding CLI referrals, 28% of OHPs reported referring clients to CLI, with self-efficacy being the key determinant. Also, professional-based barriers (e.g. lack of time, preference for referral to well-known professionals) were determinants of CLI referral.
While a significant number of Dutch OHPs practise lifestyle counselling, there is room for improvement by addressing barriers and enhancing self-efficacy. Training and structural support are recommended to increase the prevalence and quality of lifestyle counselling and referrals to CLI. This study highlights the importance of integrating lifestyle medicine into occupational health to prevent chronic illnesses such as obesity, and improve employee health outcomes.
近几十年来,生活方式医学不仅在普通医疗保健领域,而且在职业健康领域都受到了越来越多的关注。作为预防工作的一部分,荷兰的职业医生被鼓励提供生活方式咨询,并推荐生活方式干预措施,如综合生活方式干预(CLI)。然而,我们并不清楚职业医生和其他职业健康专业人员(OHP)目前在多大程度上开展生活方式咨询。本研究旨在评估荷兰OHP目前的生活方式咨询实践情况,并确定这些实践以及特别是转介至CLI的决定因素。
对荷兰两个大型职业健康中心的266名OHP进行了横断面调查。该调查由基于生活方式咨询的评估、建议、同意、协助、安排(5A)框架以及态度、社会规范、自我效能感(ASE)模型的项目和量表组成。通过描述性统计、相关性分析和层次回归分析对数据进行分析。
大多数OHP(70.3%)评估了其客户当前的生活方式,而49.1%评估了客户改变的动机。65%的OHP希望更频繁地讨论或建议生活方式。压力和身体活动是设定目标建议(同意)中最常涉及的主题。OHP的自我效能感和态度是生活方式咨询实践中59%差异的最重要决定因素。更多的时间、培训和工具被认为是生活方式咨询的促进因素。关于CLI转介,28%的OHP报告将客户转介至CLI,自我效能感是关键决定因素。此外,基于专业的障碍(如时间不足、倾向于转介给知名专业人员)也是CLI转介的决定因素。
虽然相当数量的荷兰OHP开展生活方式咨询,但通过解决障碍和提高自我效能感仍有改进空间。建议进行培训和提供结构性支持,以提高生活方式咨询以及转介至CLI的普及率和质量。本研究强调了将生活方式医学纳入职业健康以预防肥胖等慢性病并改善员工健康结果的重要性。