154594 Using results from the 2004 National Worksite Health Promotion Survey to identify areas for improving the health of employees at the workplace

Tuesday, November 6, 2007: 8:30 AM

Laura Linnan, ScD , Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, UNC-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
J. Michael Bowling, PhD , Health Behavior and Health Education, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
Garry Lindsay, MPH, CHES , Partnership for Prevention, Washington, DC, DC
Jennifer Childress, MS, CHES , Partnership for Prevention, Santa Clara, CA
Carter Blakey , US Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Rockville, MD
Stephanie Pronk, PhD , United Health Care, Minneapolis, MN
Sharon Wieker, PhD , Anderson Corporation, Minneapolis, MN
Penelope Royall , Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, US Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD
     
Objectives: Healthy People 2010 national objectives aim for 75% of worksites (regardless of size) offering a comprehensive worksite health promotion program. We present results of a national survey designed to monitor the prevalence of worksite health promotion programs, policies, services and supportive environments.

Methods: We conducted a nationally representative cross-sectional phone survey of worksite health promotion programs stratified by worksite size and industry type. Point estimates, confidence intervals, and multivariate statistics were computed using techniques appropriate to the analysis of complex surveys.

Results: Worksites with 750+ employees consistently reported offering greater proportions of programs, policies, services and supportive environments. Only 6.9% of responding worksites offered a comprehensive worksite health promotion program. Worksites with a dedicated staff person and 750+ employees had significantly greater odds of offering a comprehensive program; while worksites in agriculture/mining or financial services were significantly less likely than other industry sectors to offer a comprehensive program.

Conclusions: Increasing the number, quality and type of health promotion programs and supports at work, especially among smaller worksites, remains an important public health imperative.

Learning Objectives:
1. Define the 5 key elements of a comprehensive worksite health promotion program as defined by Healthy Workforce 2010. 2. Identify the differences and similarities in health promotion programming, policies, and environmental supports offered by industry type and size. 3. Describe factors that likely increase the likelihood of offering a comprehensive worksite health promotion program.

Keywords: Worksite, Health Promotion

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Any relevant financial relationships? No
Any institutionally-contracted trials related to this submission?

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.

See more of: Successful Strategies in Worksite Health Promotion
See more of: Public Health Education and Health Promotion