The effectiveness of interventions in workplace health promotion as to maintain the working capacity of health care personal

Uložené v:
Podrobná bibliografia
Názov: The effectiveness of interventions in workplace health promotion as to maintain the working capacity of health care personal
Autori: Buchberger, B, Heymann, R, Huppertz, H, Friepörtner, K, Pomorin, N, Wasem, J
Zdroj: GMS Health Technol Assess
GMS Health Technology Assessment; VOL: 7; DOC06 /20110928/
Informácie o vydavateľovi: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House, 2011.
Rok vydania: 2011
Predmety: OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH, TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL, Risikoabschätzung, Methodik, demographic development, models, economic, Meta-Analyse, Arbeitszeitregelungen, Auswirkungen von, Germany, DEMOGRAPHY, randomisierte kontrollierte Studie, biomedical technology assessment, RISK ASSESSMENT, Krankheitsentstehung, ECONOMICS, MEDICAL, Effizienz, Pflege, humans, judgment, specifity, report, Ökonomie, Übersichtsliteratur, HTA, review literature as topic, clinical trial, health policy, aged, MENTAL HEALTH, Diagnose, technology, juricical, Betriebsgesundheitsdienste, Kostensenkung, SOZIALÖKONOMISCHE FAKTOREN, AGED, medical evaluation, randomisierte Zuordnung, Metaanalyse, Article, methods, 03 medical and health sciences, nursing staff/psychology, Zufall, placebos, Behandlung, Technikfolgen-Abschätzung, biomedizinische, health education, physische Gesundheit, Deutschland, HTA-report, HTA report, Gesundheitsökonomie, condition-oriented, health economic studies, randomized clinical trial, sensitivity, systematische Übersicht, Fehlzeiten, META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC, ALTE MENSCHEN, TECHNOLOGIE, MODELS, ECONOMIC, FEHLZEITEN, Kosten Effektivität, salutogenesis, REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC, fitness for employment, KONTROLLIERTE KLINISCHE STUDIEN, PRIMARY PREVENTION, risk of bias tool, meta analysis, ABSENTEEISM, costs, HEALTH EDUCATION, randomized controlled study, PLACEBOS, Pflegepersonal, sozioökonomische Faktoren, randomised clinical trial, gesundheitsökonomische Studien, Methoden, nursing, Risk of bias tool, health economics, sozialökonomische Faktoren, EbM, HEALTH POLICY, fitness for work, COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS, Rehabilitation, randomised controlled study, PSYCHISCHE GESUNDHEIT, Beurteilung, Verblindung, workableness, behaviour-oriented, RANDOMISIERUNG, randomised clinical study, RANDOM ALLOCATION, research article, controlled clinical trials as topic, Kosten und Kostenanalyse, Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse, workplace health promotion, GERMANY, technology evaluation, JUDGMENT, GESUNDHEITSPOLITIK, evidence-based medicine, randomisierter Versuch, sozio-ökonomische Faktoren, CT, EFFICIENCY, EBM, TECHNIKFOLGEN-ABSCHÄTZUNG, BIOMEDIZINISCHE, Forschungsartikel, review, effectiveness, socioeconomic factors, terms and condition of employment, Placeboeffekt, Prävention, costs and cost analysis, decision making, socioeconomics, Entscheidungsfindung, Mensch, PLAZEBOS, Sozioökonomie, care, health promotion, ÖKONOMIE, ÄRZTLICHE, cost control, therapy, ECONOMICS, cost-benefit analysis, working conditions, MENSCH, Technologie, medizinische, economics, population development, PLACEBO EFFECT, rigths, meta-analysis, CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC, orderlies, placebo, random allocation, randomized study, Krankenpflegepersonal/*Psychologie, demography, BETRIEBSGESUNDHEITSDIENSTE, diagnosis, ÖKONOMIE, Technologie, DEMOGRAPHIE, Krankenpflegepersonal/*Standard, medizinische Beurteilung, NURSING STAFF/PSYCHOLOGY, absenteeism, technology assessment, biomedical, workload, Pathogenese, 0302 clinical medicine, HEALTH PROMOTION, Kostenminimierung, prevention, Kostenanalyse, cost analysis, Gesundheitsförderung, Work Schedule Tolerance, TECHNOLOGY, MEDICAL, Vorsorge, SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS, Health Technology Assessment, risk assessment, technical report, 610 Medical sciences, Medicine, 3. Good health, meta analysis as topic, nursing staff/standards, Kosten, kontrollierte klinische Versuche, Ökonomie, ärztliche, cost-cutting, Krankenpflegepersonal, MENSCHENRECHTE, evidenzbasierte Medizin, cost reduction, primäre Prävention, COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS, ability to work, Gesundheitsfinanzierung, Arbeitsfähigkeit, PLAZEBOEFFEKT, Plazebo, randomization, verblindet, medical costs, OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH SERVICES, rehabilitation, occupational health, psychische Gesundheit, blinding, sickness costs, randomisation, DECISION MAKING, Bevölkerungsentwicklung, Technologiebewertung, DEUTSCHLAND, accident, technology assessment, economic aspect, Reha, ethics, randomised trial, CCT, Gesundheitserziehung, HUMAN RIGHTS, METAANALYSE, physical health, randomised controlled trial, randomisierte klinische Studie, EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE, Kostenreduktion, Krankheitskosten, Sensitivitä, efficacy, primary prevention, kontrollierte klinische Studie, randomized controlled trials as topic, Pharmaökonomie, ENTSCHEIDUNGSFINDUNG, Randomisierung, systematic review, Salutogenese, medizinische Bewertung, PRIMÄRE PRÄVENTION, HTA-Bericht, randomized trial, KOSTEN UND KOSTENANALYSE, alte Menschen, EFFIZIENZ, TECHNOLOGIE, MEDIZINISCHE, Modelle, ökonomische, technology, medical, treatment, NURSING STAFF, pathogenesis, RISIKOABSCHÄTZUNG, nursing staff, HUMANS, medizinische Technologie, verhältnisorientiert, Kosteneffektivität, Kosten-Effektivität, Technologiebeurteilung, social economic factors, BEURTEILUNG, Recht, ddc: 610, economics, medical, randomisierte Studie, Gesundheitspolitik, Wirksamkeit, verhaltensorientiert, Therapie, mental health, RCT, RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC, Ethik, ÜBERSICHTSLITERATUR, KOSTEN-NUTZEN-ANALYSE, Arbeitsbedingungen, Arbeitsbelastung, RANDOMISIERTE KONTROLLIERTE STUDIEN, Übersichtsarbeit, randomized clinical study, Spezifität, MODELLE, ÖKONOMISCHE, betriebliche Gesundheitsförderung, TECHNOLOGY, occupational health services, cost-effectiveness, NURSING STAFF/STANDARDS, GUTACHTENBASIERTE MEDIZIN, Placebo, WORK SCHEDULE TOLERANCE, medical assessment, Gesundheit, random, randomised study, Gesundheitsvorsorge am Arbeitsplatz, review literature, ARBEITSZEITREGELUNGEN, AUSWIRKUNGEN VON, klinische Studie, GESUNDHEITSERZIEHUNG, blinded, pharmaeconomics, Demographie, ökonomischer Aspekt, efficiency, academic review, placebo effect, Kostenkontrolle, gutachtenbasierte Medizin, Effektivität
Popis: Background The increasing proportion of elderly people with respective care requirements and within the total population stands against aging personnel and staff reduction in the field of health care where employees are exposed to high load factors. Health promotion interventions may be a possibility to improve work situations and behavior. Methods A systematic literature search is conducted in 32 databases limited to English and German publications since 1990. Moreover, internet-searches are performed and the reference lists of identified articles are scanned. The selection of literature was done by two reviewers independently according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data extraction and tables of evidence are verified by a second expert just like the assessment of risk of bias by means of the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool. Results We identified eleven intervention studies and two systematic reviews. There were three randomized controlled trials (RCT) and one controlled trial without randomization (CCT) on the improvement of physical health, four RCT and two CCT on the improvement of psychological health and one RCT on both. Study duration ranged from four weeks to two years and the number of participants included from 20 to 345, with a median of 56. Interventions and populations were predominantly heterogeneous. In three studies intervention for the improvement of physical health resulted in less complaints and increased strength and flexibility with statistically significant differences between groups. Regarding psychological health interventions lead to significantly decreased intake of analgesics, better stress management, coping with workload, communication skills and advanced training. Discussion Taking into consideration the small to very small sample sizes, other methodological flaws like a high potential of bias and poor quality of reporting the validity of the results has to be considered as limited. Due to the heterogeneity of health interventions, study populations with differing job specializations and different lengths of study durations and follow-up periods, the comparison of results would not make sense. Conclusions Further research is necessary with larger sample sizes, with a sufficient study duration and follow-up, with a lower risk of bias, by considering of relevant quality criteria and with better reporting in publications.
GMS Health Technology Assessment; 7:Doc06; ISSN 1861-8863
Druh dokumentu: Article
Other literature type
Jazyk: English
ISSN: 1861-8863
DOI: 10.3205/hta000097
Prístupová URL adresa: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22031811
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3198117/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22031811/
http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3198117
Rights: CC BY NC ND
Prístupové číslo: edsair.doi.dedup.....0180a7e848e5b65b34cb1ec702ecb8d7
Databáza: OpenAIRE
Popis
Abstrakt:Background The increasing proportion of elderly people with respective care requirements and within the total population stands against aging personnel and staff reduction in the field of health care where employees are exposed to high load factors. Health promotion interventions may be a possibility to improve work situations and behavior. Methods A systematic literature search is conducted in 32 databases limited to English and German publications since 1990. Moreover, internet-searches are performed and the reference lists of identified articles are scanned. The selection of literature was done by two reviewers independently according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data extraction and tables of evidence are verified by a second expert just like the assessment of risk of bias by means of the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool. Results We identified eleven intervention studies and two systematic reviews. There were three randomized controlled trials (RCT) and one controlled trial without randomization (CCT) on the improvement of physical health, four RCT and two CCT on the improvement of psychological health and one RCT on both. Study duration ranged from four weeks to two years and the number of participants included from 20 to 345, with a median of 56. Interventions and populations were predominantly heterogeneous. In three studies intervention for the improvement of physical health resulted in less complaints and increased strength and flexibility with statistically significant differences between groups. Regarding psychological health interventions lead to significantly decreased intake of analgesics, better stress management, coping with workload, communication skills and advanced training. Discussion Taking into consideration the small to very small sample sizes, other methodological flaws like a high potential of bias and poor quality of reporting the validity of the results has to be considered as limited. Due to the heterogeneity of health interventions, study populations with differing job specializations and different lengths of study durations and follow-up periods, the comparison of results would not make sense. Conclusions Further research is necessary with larger sample sizes, with a sufficient study duration and follow-up, with a lower risk of bias, by considering of relevant quality criteria and with better reporting in publications.<br />GMS Health Technology Assessment; 7:Doc06; ISSN 1861-8863
ISSN:18618863
DOI:10.3205/hta000097