Results of the Workplace Health in America Survey

First Published April 22, 2019 Research Article Find in PubMed

Authors

, ScD1
 
Department of Health Behavior, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
by this author
, , PhD2
 
Social Policy, Health, & Economics Research Unit, RTI International, Holly Springs, NC, USA
by this author
, , MPH, MS3
 
National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA
by this author
,
, MPH4
 
Behavioral Statistics Program, RTI International, Holly Springs, NC, USA
by this author
, , MPH1
 
Department of Health Behavior, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

by this author
...
First Published Online: April 22, 2019

To provide a nationally representative snapshot of workplace health promotion (WHP) and protection practices among United States worksites.

Cross-sectional, self-report Workplace Health in America (WHA) Survey between November 2016 and September 2017.

National.

Random sample of US worksites with ≥10 employees, stratified by region, size, and North American Industrial Classification System sector.

Workplace health promotion programs, program administration, evidence-based strategies, health screenings, disease management, incentives, work–life policies, implementation barriers, and occupational safety and health (OSH).

Descriptive statistics, t tests, and logistic regression.

Among eligible worksites, 10.1% (n = 3109) responded, 2843 retained in final sample, and 46.1% offered some type of WHP program. The proportion of comparable worksites with comprehensive programs (as defined in Healthy People 2010) rose from 6.9% in 2004 to 17.1% in 2017 (P < .001). Occupational safety and health programs were more prevalent than WHP programs, and 83.5% of all worksites had an individual responsible for employee safety, while only 72.2% of those with a WHP program had an individual responsible for it. Smaller worksites were less likely than larger to offer most programs.

The prevalence of WHP programs has increased but remains low across most health programs; few worksites have comprehensive programs. Smaller worksites have persistent deficits and require targeted approaches; integrated OSH and WHP efforts may help. Ongoing monitoring using the WHA Survey benchmarks OSH and WHP in US worksites, updates estimates from previous surveys, and identifies gaps in research and practice.

1. Bureau of Labor Statistics . Economic News Release: Employment Situation Summary. August 2018. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm, Accessed September 9, 2018.
Google Scholar
2. Fielding, JE, Piserchia, PV. Frequency of worksite health promotion activities. Am J Public Health. 1989;79(1):1620. https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdfplus/10.2105/AJPH.79.1.16, Accessed August 27, 2018.
Google Scholar
3. Biener, L, Betrera, R, Curtis, E. 1992 National Survey of Worksite Health Promotion Activities: Summary Report. Washington DC:U.S. Public Health Service; 1993.
Google Scholar
4. Association for Worksite Health Promotion, William M Mercer Inc, US Department of Health and Human Services Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion . National Worksite Health Promotion Survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services;1999.
Google Scholar
5. Linnan, L, Bowling, M, Childress, J. Results of the 2004 national worksite health promotion survey. Am J Public Health. 2008;98(8):15031509. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2006.100313.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
6. Mattke, S, Liu, H, Caloyeras, JP. Workplace Wellness Programs Study: Final Report. 2013. www.rand.org, Accessed September 10, 2018.
Google Scholar
7. McCleary, K, Goetzel, RZ, Roemer, EC, Berko, J, Kent, K, Torre, HD LA. Employer and employee opinions about workplace health promotion (Wellness) programs. J Occup Environ Med. 2017;59(3):256263. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000946.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
8. Willis Towers Watson . Improving Workforce Health and Productivity: Connecting the Elements of Workplace and Culture: US Findings of Willis Towers Watson’s 2015/2016 [email protected] Survey. Willis Towers Watson; 2016.
Google Scholar
9. Claxton, G, Rae, M, Long, M, Damico, A, Foster, G, Whitmore, H. 2017 Employer Health Benefits Survey. 2017. http://files.kff.org/attachment/Report-Employer-Health-Benefits-Annual-Survey-2017, Accessed February 22, 2019.
Google Scholar
10. DeJoy, DM, Dyal, MA, Padilla, HM, Wilson, MG. National workplace health promotion surveys: the affordable care act and future surveys. Am J Heal Promot. 2014;28(3):142145. doi: 10.4278/ajhp.121212-CIT-602.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
11. US Department of Health and Human Services . Healthy People 2010: Goals for the Nation. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2000.
Google Scholar
12. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . Workplace Health Promotion: Worksite Health ScoreCard. 2016. https://www.cdc.gov/workplacehealthpromotion/initiatives/healthscorecard/index.html, Accessed March 1, 2018.
Google Scholar
13. The Community Preventive Services Task Force . The Community Guide. 20052012. https://www.thecommunityguide.org/. Accessed August 30, 2018.
Google Scholar
14. Sorensen, G, Barbeau, E, Stoddard, AM, Hunt, MK, Kaphingst, K, Wallace, L. Promoting behavior change among working-class, multiethnic workers: results of the healthy directions--small business study. Am J Public Health. 2005;95(8):13891395. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.038745.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
15. Laing, SS, Hannon, PA, Talburt, A, Kimpe, S, Williams, B, Harris, JR. Increasing evidence-based workplace health promotion best practices in small and low-wage companies, Mason County, Washington, 2009. Prev Chronic Dis. 2012;9:E83. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22480612, Accessed August 30, 2018.
Google Scholar
16. McCoy, K, Stinson, K, Scott, K, Tenney, L, Newman, LS. Health promotion in small business: a systematic review of factors influencing adoption and effectiveness of worksite wellness programs. J Occup Environ Med. 2014;56(6):579587. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000171.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
17. US Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy . 2018 Small Business Profile. 2018. https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/2018-Small-Business-Profiles-US.pdf, Accessed August 30, 2018.
Google Scholar
18. Frieden, TR . A framework for public health action: the health impact pyramid. Am J Public Health. 2010;100(4):590595. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.185652.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
19. Sorensen, G, Stoddard, AM, LaMontagne, AD. A comprehensive worksite cancer prevention intervention: behavior change results from a randomized controlled trial (United States). Cancer Causes Control. 2002;13(6):493502. doi: 10.1023/A:1016385001695.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
20. Goetzel, RZ, Henke, RM, Tabrizi, M. Do Workplace health promotion (Wellness) programs work? J Occup Environ Med. 2014;56(9):927934. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000276.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
21. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . Workplace Health Model. 2016. https://www.cdc.gov/workplacehealthpromotion/model/index.html, Accessed August 6, 2018.
Google Scholar
22. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) . Essential elements of effective workplace programs and policies for improving worker health and wellbeing. 2008. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2010-140/pdfs/2010-140.pdf, Accessed August 6, 2018.
Google Scholar
23. Meador, A, Lang, JE, Davis, WD. Comparing 2 national organization-level workplace health promotion and improvement tools, 2013-2015. Prev Chronic Dis. 2016;13:E136. doi: 10.5888/pcd13.160164.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
24. Linnan, LA, Sorensen, G, Colditz, G, Klar, N, Emmons, KM. Using theory to understand the multiple determinants of low participation in worksite health promotion programs. Heal Educ Behav. 2001;28(5):591607. doi: 10.1177/109019810102800506.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
25. Sherman, BW . Predictors of health self-management program preference among lower-to-middle wage employed adults with chronic health conditions. the time is now for determining the role of social determinants: an editorial reaction to Dr Kneipp and colleagues. Am J Heal Promot. 2019;33(2):170171. doi: 10.1177/0890117118823162.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
26. Henning, R, Warren, N, Robertson, M, Faghri, P, Cherniack, M; The CPH-NEW Research Team . Workplace health protection and promotion through participatory ergonomics: an integrated approach. Public Health Rep. 2009;124(suppl 1):2635. doi: 10.1177/00333549091244S104.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
27. Terry, PE . Incentives and Big E engagement. Am J Heal Promot. 2017;31(6):462464. doi: 10.1177/0890117117737221.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
28. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) . Total Worker Health. 2017. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/twh/totalhealth.html, Accessed December 12, 2017.
Google Scholar
29. Dillman, DA, Smyth, JD, Christian, LM. Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2014.
Google Scholar
30. Brick, JM, Williams, D. Explaining rising nonresponse rates in cross-sectional surveys. Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci. 2013;645(1):3659. doi: 10.1177/0002716212456834.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
31. Merchant, JA, Lind, DP, Kelly, KM, Hall, JL. An employee total health management–based survey of iowa employers. J Occup Environ Med. 2013;55:S73S77. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000045.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline

Access content

To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.
  • Access Options

    My Account

    Welcome
    You do not have access to this content.

    Chinese Institutions / 中国用户

    Click the button below for the full-text content

    请点击以下获取该全文

    Institutional Access

    does not have access to this content.

    Purchase Content

    24 hours online access to download content

    Added to Cart

    Cart is full

    There is currently no price available for this item in your region.

    Research off-campus without worrying about access issues. Find out about Lean Library here


Purchase

AHP-article-ppv for GBP32.00
AHP-article-ppv for $41.50
Single Issue 24 hour E-access for GBP150.28
Single Issue 24 hour E-access for $192.66

Top