Barriers to participation in a worksite wellness program

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to determine barriers that prevent participation in an employee wellness program, Wellness Wednesdays: "Eat & Meet" About Healthy Living, conducted at East Carolina University (ECU) in Greenville, North Carolina. All ECU ARAMARK employees (n = 481) over the age of 18 were eligible to participate in the wellness program. Weekly 30 minute classes, taught by a Registered Dietitian, on various nutrition- and health-related topics were conducted for 10-weeks. Five question knowledge quizzes were administered to participants at the end of each class to determine the comprehension of material presented. Qualitative interviews (n = 19) were conducted with employees (participants and non-participants) and the program organizer after the completion of the 10-week program to identify barriers to program participation. A total of 50 (10.4% of the total number of potential participants) ECU ARAMARK employees, managers, and leadership team directors attended Wellness Wednesdays at least once during the 10-week program. Employees, on average, scored 71-100% on the weekly knowledge quizzes administered at the end of each class. The most common barriers to participation reported included (most often to least often reported): insufficient incentives, inconvenient locations, time limitations, not interested in topics presented, undefined reasons, schedule, marketing, health beliefs, and not interested in the program. Results showed that employee wellness programs can be effective in increasing knowledge of employees on nutrition- and health-related topics. However, program planning that addresses identified barriers including insufficient incentives, inconvenient locations, and time limitations may facilitate higher participation in future worksite wellness opportunities.

Financial Incentives and Diabetes Disease Control in Employees: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

“…Redesign should include employees with chronic disease as stakeholders to explore barriers to program participation, [35][36][37] and to ensure the program and incentive designs are both equitable 38 and desirable. Shared incentives for patients and physicians may also guide future programs.…”

Towards Effective Design and Evaluation of Workplace Wellness Programs

“…16,17,33 It has been suggested that these moderate and non-significant effects may be due to low participation rates, which are typically below 50% of eligible employees. [21][22][23] This issue of low participation rates has been recognized in the literature and guidance on wellness program design recommends attention whether a program is reaching a variety of employees. 4 Typically, evaluators of wellness programs include employee participation as a central metric on which evaluations are based.…”

“…[18][19][20] Two related reasons for programs' mixed effects on health behavior and economic outcomes are low participation rates and employee perceptions. Participation rates for workplace wellness programs tend to be below 50% of eligible employees, 21,22 which may be at the root of small or insignificant changes in health behavior. 23 Indeed, achieving high participation is a key part of guidance on developing effective workplace wellness programs.…”

“…One reason may be due to low participation rates, which are typically below 50% of eligible employees. [21][22][23] Incentives, one of the key components described above, are typically used to increase participation numbers.…”

Workplace wellbeing programs: If you build it they may NOT come…because it’s not what they really need!

“…Despite the personal assistance offered by such programs, employee participation rates are typically quite low (Goetzel & Ozminkowski, 2008;L. Linman et al, 2008;McCarthy et al, 2011;McGillivray, 2002;Rongen et al, 2014) and several studies have sought to examine the common barriers to participation (Bright et al, 2012;Lakerveld et al, 2008;Linnan, Sorensen, Colditz, Klar, & Emmons, 2001;Person, Colby, Bulova, & Eubanks, 2010;Robroek, van Lenthe, van Empelen, & Burdorf, 2009). Indeed, the participation issue has become so significant in the United States that the use of incentives is now commonplace, with estimates suggesting that incentive increases of $100 can improve participation rates by 10% (Goetzel & Ozminkowski, 2008).…”