Process evaluation of workplace health promotion in a sheltered workplace

A care ethics perspective

Datos Bibliográficos

ID22945340
AutoresHanneke van Heijster (0000-0001-9064-7788, Wageningen University & Research, autor de correspondencia), Jantien van Berkel (0000-0003-3400-9655, Wageningen University & Research), Minne Bakker (Department of Medical Humanities, Amsterdam UMC, VU University , Amsterdam , The Netherlands), Cécile R L Boot (0000-0001-5021-9957), Cécile Boot (Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam , The Netherlands), Emely De Vet (0000-0002-4452-2367, Wageningen University & Research)
Año2023
Volumen38
Número2
Fecha de publicación2023-04-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaHealth Promotion International (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0957-4824 • E-ISSN: 1460-2245
EditorialOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1093/heapro/daad031
PMID37057390
OpenAlexW4365479278
IdiomaEN
Referencias citadas25

Despite the potential health benefits of workplace health promotion for employees in sheltered workplaces, participation is often limited. The aim of this study was (i) to understand this limited participation, and (ii) to find opportunities for adapting workplace health promotion, such that it better meets the needs of the target population. A responsive process evaluation of an extensive multi-component workplace health promotion program targeting lifestyle behaviors, financial behaviors, literacy and citizenship, was performed in a large, sheltered workplace in the Netherlands (>3500 employees). To understand the limited participation, interviews with employees (n = 8), supervisors (n = 7) and managers (n = 2), and 10 participant observations were performed. To find opportunities for improving workplace health promotion in the sheltered workplace, 7 dialogs with employees were performed (n = 30). The interview data on the barriers for participation were evaluated through the lens of care ethics, as this allowed to understand the role of various stakeholders in the limited participation, as well as the indirect role of the institutional context. Findings showed that participation in workplace health promotion could increase if it is organized in a way that it encourages employees to work on health together, allow to tailor activities to different needs and capabilities of employees, and connects activities to employees’ daily lives. A strength of this study is that the responsive process evaluation focused both on barriers for participation, as well as on opportunities to increase participation.

Engineering ethics · Health care · Health promotion · Perspective (graphical) · Political science · Process (computing) · Promotion (chess) · Public health · Public relations · Sociology · Workplace health promotion · Computer Science · Engineering · Health, psychology, and well-being · Medicine · Nursing · Occupational Health and Safety Research · Psychology · Workplace Health and Well-being