Comparison of Interventions to Promote Health in Workers

Comparison of Interventions to Promote Health in Workers: A Cluster Randomized Controled Trial

The goal of this research was to investigate different intervention strategies in the workplace and their impact on quality of life of workers from companies in the city of Londrina, Parana, Brazil.

The interventions were composed by exercise in the workplace and educational interventions.

The workplace has special features about human behaviors. Studies (Shepard 1996, Pratt 2008) has shown that workers participate of this kind of health promotion programs for various reasons: One reason is the convenience of doing something without having to look for it; another reason is group support, many workers who share difficulties due to their working demands can find support in each other, so that they could change health behavior. Furthermore there are patterns of formal and informal communication that can contribute to help more people to become healthier making their environment better. Finally, the norms of a corporate behavior can unite the group of workers seeking same objectives.

Additionally the literature has shown that adults increased workload, job insecurity and pressure to perform tasks (Sparks 1997). These facts has been shown that workplace is different from community based interventions and leisure interventions.

The outcomes proposed to study are different from other studies since the interventions focus changes in behaviors. Sedentary behavior has shown to have 23% of deaths from major chronic disease (WHO 2002).

As the populations rises around the world and with the prolonged life expectancies, the number of people with chronic diseases will raise (WHO 2006). By having positive changes in health behavior the costs of public health can be reduced. Studying different types of interventions and testing its efficacy in different places can help the policy makers to create healthier environments.

There are strategies being developed in the workplace, but its efficacy is being challenged. There are some researches that show no evidence to prove the continuity of these interventions and there are evidences proving the opposite, positive changes in clinical outcomes as diabetes, blood pressure and elevated blood cholesterol. In addition some measures as BMI, anthropometric, fitness level have shown good association as prediction of development of chronic disease with low cost (Dishman 2004).

Inclusion Criteria The inclusion criteria for participation of these study were never participated of and quality of life and health intervention program at work and had an interest in participating in the study. Included workers ≥ 18years who had to work in the office position, sitting at the computer most of the work shift.

Exclusion criteria: temporary workers and freelancers.