Information on external validity of work site health promotion research is essential to translate research findings to practice. The authors provide a literature review of work site health behavior interventions. Using the RE-AIM framework, they summarize characteristics and results of these studies to document reporting of intervention reach, adoption, implementation, and maintenance. The authors reviewed a total of 24 publications from 11 leading health behavior journals. They found that participation rates among eligible employees were reported in 87.5% of studies; only 25% of studies reported on intervention adoption. Data on characteristics of participants versus nonparticipants were reported in fewer than 10% of studies. Implementation data were reported in 12.5% of the studies. Only 8% of studies reported any type of maintenance data. Stronger emphasis is needed on representativeness of employees, work site settings studied, and longer term results. Examples of how this can be done are provided.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. Abrams DB, Emmons KM, Linnan L, Biener L: Smoking cessation at the workplace: Conceptual and practical considerations, in Richmond R (ed.): Interventions for Smokers: An International Perspective. New York: Williams & Wilkins, 1994, pp. 137-169.
2.
2. Emmons KM, Paper Contribution F: Behavioral and social science contributions to the health of adults in the United States. BD Smedly, SL Syme, eds. Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 2000, pp. 254-321.
3.
3. Pelletier KR: A review and analysis of the clinical and cost-effectiveness studies of comprehensive health promotion and disease management programs at the worksite: 1995-1998 update. Am J Health Prom13:333-345, 1999.
4.
4. Terborg JR, Glasgow RE: Worksite interventions: A brief review of health promotion programs at work, in Baum A, McManus C, Newman S, Weinman J, West R (eds.): Cambridge Handbook of Psychology, Health and Medicine. London: Cambridge University Press, 1997, pp. 264-268.
5.
5. Glasgow RE, McCaul KD, Fisher KJ: Participation in worksite health promotion: A critique of the literature and recommendations for future practice. Health Educ Q20:391-408, 1993.
11. Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM: Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: The RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health89:1322-1327, 1999.
12.
12. Glasgow RE, McKay HG, Piette JD, Reynolds KD: The RE-AIM framework for evaluating interventions: What can it tell us about approaches to chronic illness management? Patient Educ Couns44:119-127, 2001.
13.
13. Glasgow RE: Evaluation models for theory-based interventions: Enhancing the translation of theory and research to practice, in Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer BK (eds.): Health Behavior and Health Education. San Francisco: Josey Bass, 2002.
14.
14. Green LM, Kreuter MW: Health Promotion Planning: An Educational and Ecological Approach. New York: Mayfield, 1999.
15.
15. Abrams DB, Orleans CT, Niaura RS, Goldstein MG, Prochaska JO, Velicer W: Integrating individual and public health perspectives for treatment of tobacco dependence under managed health care: A combined stepped care and matching model. Ann Intern Med18:290-304, 1996.
16.
16. Rogers EM: Diffusion of Innovations. New York, Free Press, 1995.
17.
17. Oldenburg BF, Sallis JF, Ffrench ML, Owen N: Health promotion research and the diffusion and institutionalization of interventions. Health Educ Res14:121-130, 1999.
18.
18. Oldenburg B, French BF, Sallis JF: Health behavior research: The quality of the evidence base. Am J Health Prom14:253-257, 2000.
19.
19. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG for the CONSORT Group: The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports. JAMA285:1987-1991, 2001.
20.
20. Haddix AC, Teutsch SM, Shaffer PA, Dunet DO: Prevention Effectiveness: A Guide to Decisions Analysis and Economic Evaluation. New York, Oxford University Press, 1996.
21.
21. Zaza S, Lawrence RS, Mahan CS, et al: Task Force on community preventive services. Scope and organization of the Guide to Community Preventive Services. Am J Prev Med18:27-34, 2000.
22.
22. Centers for Disease Control: The Guide to Community Preventive Services, 2002. Available: http://thecommunityguide.org.
23.
23. Joffe M, Mindell J: A framework for the evidence base to support health impact assessment. J Epidemiol Community Health56:132-138, 2002.
24.
24. Heller RF, Dobson AJ: Disease impact number and population impact number: Population perspectives to measures of risk and benefits. BMJ321:950-953, 2000.
25.
25. Heller RF, Page J: A population perspective to evidence based medicine: Evidence for population health. J Epidemiol Community Health56:45-47, 2002.
26.
26. Rychetnik L, Frommer M, Howe P, Shiell A: Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health56:119-127, 2002.
27.
27. France EK, Glasgow RE, Marcus AC: Smoking cessation interventions among hospitalized patients: What have we learned? Prev Med32:376-388, 2001.
28.
28. Lando HA, Valanis BG, Lichtenstein EL, et al: Promoting smoking abstinence in pregnant and postpartum patients: A comparison of 2 approaches. Am J Managed Care7:685-693, 2001.
29.
29. Eakin EG, Glasgow RE, Riley KM: Counseling patients to increase physical activity: A review of the effectiveness of current strategies. J Fam Pract49:158-168, 2000.
30.
30. Glasgow RE, Whitlock EP, Eakin EG, Lichtenstein E: A brief smoking cessation intervention for women in low-income planned parenthood clinics. Am J Public Health90:786-789, 2000.
31.
31. Glasgow RE, Toobert DJ, Hampson SE, Strycker LA: Implementation, generalization, and long-term results of the “Choosing Well” diabetes self-management intervention. Patient Education and Counseling48(2):113-122, 2002.
32.
32. Flay BR: Efficacy and effectiveness trials (and other phases of research) in the development of health promotion programs. Prev Med15:451-474, 1986.
34. Borland R, Owens N, Tooley G, Trejis I, Roberts L, Hill D: Promoting reduced smoking rates in the context of workplace smoking bans. Am J Health Prom14:1-3, 1999.
35.
35. Kristal AR, Glanz K, Tilley BC, Li S: Mediating factors in dietary change: Understanding the impact of a worksite nutrition intervention. Health Educ Behav27:112-125, 2000.
36.
36. Marcus BH, Emmons KM, Simkin-Silverman LR, et al: Evaluation of motivationally tailored vs. standard self-help physical activity interventions at the workplace. Am J Health Prom12:246-253, 1998.
37.
37. Glanz K, Patterson RE, Kristal AR, et al: Impact of work site health promotion on stages of dietary change: The Working Well Trial. Health Educ Behav25:448-463, 1998.
38.
38. Peterson TR, Aldana SG: Improving exercise behavior: An application of the stages of change model in a worksite setting. Am J Health Prom13:229-232, 1999.
39.
39. Sorensen G, Stoddard A, Ockene JK, Hunt MK, Youngstrom R: Worker participation in an integrated health promotion/health protection program: Results from the WellWorks project. Health Educ Q23:191-203, 1996.
40.
40. Hunt MK, Lederman R, Potter S, Stoddard A, Sorensen G: Results of employee involvement in planning and implementing the Treatwell 5-a-Day worksite study. Health Educ Behav27:223-231, 2000.
41.
41. Biener L, Glanz K, McLerran D, et al: Impact of the Working Well Trial on the worksite smoking and nutrition environment. Health Educ Behav26:478-494, 1999.
42.
42. Jason LA, Salina D, McMahon SD, Hedeker D, Stockton M: A worksite smoking intervention: A 2-year assessment of groups, incentives, and self-help. Health Educ Res12:129-138, 1997.
43.
43. Sorensen G, Thompson B, Glanz K, et al: Work site-based cancer prevention: Primary results from the Working Well Trial. Am J Public Health86:939-947, 1996.
44.
44. Resnicow K, Davis M, Smith M: Results of the Teach Well worksite wellness program. Am J Public Health88:250-257, 1998.
45.
45. Willemsen MC, De Vries H, van Breukelen G, Genders R: Long-term effectiveness of two Dutch worksite smoking cessation programs. Health Educ Behav25:418-435, 1998.
46.
46. Emmons KM, Linnan LA, Shadel WG, Marcus B, Abrams DB: The Working Healthy Project: A worksite health-promotion trial targeting physical activity, diet and smoking. J Occup Environ Med41:545-555, 1999.
47.
47. Patterson RE, Kristal AR, Biener L, Varnes J, Zeng Z, Glanz K, Stables G, Chamberlain RM, Probart C: Durability and diffusion of the nutrition intervention in the Working Well Trial. Prev Med27:668-673, 1998.
48.
48. Little RJA: Modeling the drop-out mechanism in repeated-measures studies. J Am Stat Assoc90:1112-1121, 1995.
49.
49. Shadish WR, Cook TD, Campbell PT: Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Design for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 2002.
