Abstract
Background: Workplaces are an important setting to deliver programs to reduce risk factors for noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). To help decision makers understand the most current and relevant evidence regarding effectiveness of workplace programs, we conducted an umbrella review to present a comprehensive synthesis of the large volume of literature.
Methods: Systematic reviews of workplace interventions targeting primary risk factors for NCDs—unhealthy diet, insufficient physical activity, overweight/obesity, tobacco use, and/or excessive alcohol use—published since 2010 were sourced. For each risk factor, reviews were categorized by intervention type and quality. The most recent, high-quality review was included for each intervention type. Evidence for the effectiveness of each intervention type was then broadly classified based on the review summary findings.
Results: Twenty-one reviews were included. Most reviews focused on diet (n = 5), physical activity (n = 7), or obesity (n = 9) interventions, with fewer targeting alcohol (n = 2) or tobacco (n = 2) use. Reviews of interventions focusing on individual behavior (such as education or counseling) were most common. Across diet, obesity, physical activity, and tobacco use, multicomponent interventions were consistently likely to be classified as “likely effective.” Motivational interviewing and broad health promotion interventions were identified as “promising” for alcohol use.
Conclusion: This umbrella review identified that multicomponent workplace interventions were effective to reduce NCD risk factors. There is a gap around interventions targeting alcohol use as most syntheses lacked enough studies to draw conclusions about effectiveness. Exploring the impact of interventions that utilize policy and/or environmental strategies is a critical gap for future research.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
; Bezzina, Aaron 2 ; Lamont, Hannah 3 ; Barnes, Courtney 1 ; Lum, Melanie 4 ; Hodder, Rebecca K 1 ; Leung, Gloria K W 4 ; Peeters, Anna 4 ; Wolfenden, Luke 1 ; Yoong, Serene 5 1 School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle , Callaghan, NSW, Australia
2 Centre for Resources Health and Safety, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, University of Newcastle , Callaghan 2308, NSW, Australia
3 Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District , Wallsend, NSW, Australia
4 Institute for Health Transformation, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University , Melbourne, VIC, Australia
5 National Centre of Implementation Science, University of Newcastle , Callaghan, NSW, Australia





