Search

Objective: Workplace health programs can be ineffective, and changes are likely to be temporary without first establishing a wellness infrastructure. This study sought to determine whether attending a WorkWell KS Building the Worksite Wellness Foundation (Foundation) workshop enabled worksites to develop this infrastructure., Methods: Survey data were collected from worksites before attending a workshop and approximately 1 year later. Survey items were designed to assess whether the worksite was implementing best practices., Results: In total, 212 worksites participated in a workshop and completed both a baseline and follow-up assessments. At follow-up, more worksites reported having a wellness committee (89.6% vs 59.7%, P < 0.001) and having wellness committee duties included in position descriptions (26.2% vs 6.4%, P < 0.001)., Conclusions: This study suggests that Foundation workshops can support worksites' implementation of best practices to establish worksite wellness infrastructure., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None declared., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.)

Reducing sedentary behavior in the workplace has become an important public health priority; however, some employers have expressed concerns regarding the potential for reduced productivity if employees are not seated while at work. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the relationship between workplace sedentary behavior (sitting time) and work productivity among full-time office-based employees, and further to investigate other potential factors associated with productivity. A 19-item online self-report survey was completed by 2068 government employees in Kansas. The survey assessed workplace sedentary behavior, work productivity, job satisfaction, and fatigue. Overall, office workers reported high levels of sedentary time (mean > 78%). The primary results indicated that sitting time was not significantly associated with productivity ( β = 0.013, p = 0.519), but job satisfaction and fatigue were positively ( β = 0.473, p < 0.001) and negatively ( β = -0.047, p = 0.023) associated with productivity, respectively. Furthermore, participants with the highest level of sitting time (>91% of the time) reported lower job satisfaction and greater fatigue as compared with the lowest level of sitting time (<75% of the time). Taken together, these results offer promising support that less sitting time is associated with positive outcomes that do not seem to come at the expense of productivity., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability of a comprehensive worksite-level assessment and identify which worksite wellness best practices were implemented following a workshop., Methods: Kansas worksites attended a WorkWell Kansas Phase I workshop from 2012 through 2014 and completed a 155-item assessment before the workshop and 1 year later. Cronbach alpha measured the internal consistency of the WorkWell KS Phase I Assessment, and McNemar test assessed differences in proportions from baseline to follow-up., Results: Two hundred eighty five worksites completed a baseline assessment, of which, 109 completed the follow-up assessment (32%). The internal consistency of the instrument was 0.96, and worksites reported significant improvements at follow-up from baseline for nine variables., Conclusions: Improvements predominantly included creating a wellness committee, assessing needs, and developing goals. There was a lack of policy and systems level improvements at the worksite.

Background: Worksite wellness programs that target individual employees, rather than worksites, have demonstrated limited long-term success. The purpose of this overview was to describe the theoretical basis for implementing an effective worksite wellness initiative, WorkWell Kansas (WorkWell KS). WorkWell KS is not a traditional worksite wellness initiative, as its goal is to create healthy worksites, rather than target workers. Methods : The WorkWell KS Strategic Framework is based on academic research that identified successful worksite wellness elements that produce sustainably healthy worksites. The curricula were built around the 3-4-80: three modifiable behaviors (tobacco use, poor access to nutritious foods and beverages, and physical inactivity) contribute to at least four chronic diseases (heart disease, type II diabetes, lung disease, and some cancers), which in turn contribute to approximately 80% of the premature deaths in the United States. Findings : To properly address these modifiable behaviors, the WorkWell KS Strategic Framework was developed to guide worksites to first build a solid worksite wellness foundation, which consists of five elements: the wellness committee, exercising leadership, communications, incentives, and data. Once built, worksites are then encouraged to employ a socio-ecological approach to developing a comprehensive, multi-strategy (information, program, benefit design, policy, and environment) intervention, focusing on one health behavior at a time. Conclusions/Application to Practice : The goal of WorkWell KS was to create healthy worksites, which creates environments for employees to practice these healthy behaviors. Worksite wellness committees, occupational health professionals, and others interested in altering health behaviors at worksites have an opportunity to reframe their approach using this framework.

Recruiting for wellness initiatives is challenging. WorkWell KS, a statewide worksite wellness initiative, offers unique worksite recruitment strategies that may serve as lessons. From 2012 to 2018, WorkWell KS utilized champions, well-connected local leaders, to recruit worksites. A total of 784 worksites were recruited for at least one WorkWell KS workshop. A survey of champions requested identification of strategies, barriers and facilitators for successful recruitment and continued engagement. Forty-three champions reported on recruitment experiences. Sixty-three percent of respondents attributed recruitment success to having funding to complete their work. Face-to-face meetings was the most commonly reported successful strategy. Eighty-six percent of respondents reported that improving employee health was motivation for worksites to participate. Champions with a significant funding incentive for worksites commonly indicated that funding was a motivating factor. The most commonly selected factor for continued engagement was having a worksite staff member with wellness in their job description (67% of respondents). Forty-nine percent of respondents reported worksites' lack of time as a barrier to participation. The WorkWell KS initiative has implemented innovative recruitment methods that leverage well-connected leaders to recruit worksites to participate in a comprehensive worksite wellness initiative. Future worksite-based initiatives may benefit from adopting recruitment strategies presented here., (� The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The purpose of this study was to identify the extent to which sedentary behavior interventions are being implemented in Kansas worksites. The WorkWell KS Physical Activity Assessment was administered online to 111 worksites across Kansas from October 2016 through April 2018. Each worksite identified a point of contact to complete the worksite-level assessment. Four of the WorkWell KS Physical Activity Assessment's items assessed interventions that may reduce employees' sedentary behavior: offering point-of-decision prompts to reduce employees' sedentary behavior, offering a program for employees to reduce their sedentary time at work, having an organizational norm that allows employees to stand, stretch, and/or move during meetings at least every 30 minutes, and offering standing desks. All 111 worksites that participated in the WorkWell KS Physical Activity Workshop completed the WorkWell KS Physical Activity Assessment, resulting in a 100% response rate. Most worksites (59%, n = 65) reported offering no information, program, policy, or environmental change interventions aimed to reduce sedentary behavior. The most commonly reported intervention offered by worksites to reduce employees' sedentary behavior was standing desks (32%, n = 35). Overall, participating worksites reported implementing a few interventions that are designed to reduce sedentary behavior.

Background: This study sought to examine the relationship between tobacco-free policies at worksites to worksite demographics such as company size and geographic location., Methods: Worksites participating in a worksite wellness workshop were asked to complete a worksite wellness instrument, which provided an assessment of their wellness practices already in place in the worksite, including the degree to which tobacco-free policies were in place at the worksite., Results: At a bivariate level, those more likely to have tobacco-free policies included: urban employers (76.8% versus 50% rural employers, p = 0.0001); large employers (> = 250 employees) (74.3% versus 43.1% small employers (<50 employees), p = 0.0003); and schools (69.4%) and hospitals (61.5%) (versus 35.5%, agricultural/ manufacturing employers, p = 0.0125). At the multivariate level, rural employers (AOR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.23, 0.95) and small employers (AOR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.16, 0.71) had decreased odds, compared to their urban and large employer counterparts, of having tobacco-free policies., Conclusions: Rural and smaller employers are less likely to have tobacco-free policies than their urban and large counterparts.

Intervention: In an effort to increase physical activity, 15 workplaces participated in a minimal-contact 10,000-steps-a-day program sponsored by the Sedgwick County Health Department in 2007 and 2008. Pedometers were provided to measure participants' weekly steps for the 10-week intervention., Method: Participants were defined as those who completed the preregistration survey and logged at least 1 week of results. Registrants were defined as those who completed a registration survey but did not log any weekly results. The primary dependent variable was whether or not participants achieved weekly success, as measured by achieving at least 70,000 steps in a week. A secondary dependent variable was participants' number of steps each week during the weeks they logged results. Repeated measures logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with weekly success., Results: Of the 2,515 registrants, 1,292 (51%) were participants. The average number of weeks of participation for this 10-week intervention was 5.6 weeks (SD = 3.4). Those from small employers (n < 750) were more likely (OR = 2.0) than those from large organizations (n > 750) to become participants. Participants who achieved at least 70,000 steps in the first week of the intervention were 7.3 times more likely than participants who walked less than 70,000 steps in the first week to achieve 70,000 steps each week for all 10 weeks., Conclusions: Results from implementing a minimal-contact 10,000-step intervention can be maximized by targeting small worksites and supporting employees to achieve 70,000 steps in their first week., (© 2015 Society for Public Health Education.)

Objective: This study explores the decision-making process, including motivating factors, for small and midsized businesses in the Midwest to implement health promotion initiatives., Method: This a replication of a study conducted in the Pacific Northwest. Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with key informants from 12 Midwestern metropolitan employers with fewer than 1,000 employees. Informants were interviewed regarding their companies' policies and practices around workplace health promotion programming adoption and valuation., Results: Workplace health promotion adoption at these small and midsized businesses was motivated by three goals: to lower health care costs, to address human relations objectives, and to improve productivity. Low upfront cost was the most frequently considered criterion in choosing which workplace health promotion program to offer. Barriers to implementation included lack of employee buy-in, prohibitive costs, and personnel or time constraints. Aids to implementation included employee buy-in and affordability., Conclusions: This study suggests that cost considerations predominate in the workplace health promotion decision-making process at small to midsized businesses. Furthermore, employee buy-in cannot be underestimated as a factor in successful program implementation or longevity. Employees, along with executives and human resources management, must be appropriately targeted by health promotion practitioners in workplace health promotion efforts.