Effects of a low-intensity worksite-based nutrition intervention

Abstract

Male employees from four local worksites were recruited to participate in a short-term and low-intensity nutrition intervention which focused on promoting low-fat dietary habits. The sites were randomized to control conditions or to the intervention programme that consisted of an individualized health risk appraisal, group sessions, mass media activities and environmental changes. Participants were seen before and three months after intervention to measure blood lipids, nutrition knowledge and dietary changes. Eighty-three per cent of all eligible subjects were screened (n = 770) and follow-up measures were obtained for 82%. The score for nutrition knowledge improved significantly in the intervention group. There was also a net reduction in the intake of total calories and in the percentage of energy from total fat. Reported intake of carbohydrates and proteins increased. For all employees assessed, there were no changes in mean total cholesterol level or fatty acid composition. Only among participants with hypercholesterolemia was a significant reduction in blood cholesterol observed. This low-intensity intervention programme achieved some self-reported dietary changes and was successful (at least in part because statistical regression needs to be considered) in obtaining a more short-term beneficial cholesterol level in employees at higher cardiovascular risk.

Health promotion trials at worksites and risk factors for cancer

“…Those using workers as the unit of analysis took into account the effect of the cluster randomization procedure by incorporating a nested design structure (29,36,37,51) or by using other procedures (18,30,31,35,47). Seven trials did not take cluster randomization into account when analyzing their data (12,16,24,28,38,47,49).…”

“…Most (N=27) of them focused on tobacco control either exclusively (8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21) or as part of a wider health promotion program (22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34). Sixteen health promotion programs focused exclusively (35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43) or in part (23-27, 31, 34, 43) on diet. An increase in physical activity was the goal for 14 health promotion trials; in 3 it was the exclusive factor (44)(45)(46), and in 11 it was part of a wider health promotion program (24, 25, 29-34, 43, 47, 48).…”

“…An increase in physical activity was the goal for 14 health promotion trials; in 3 it was the exclusive factor (44)(45)(46), and in 11 it was part of a wider health promotion program (24, 25, 29-34, 43, 47, 48). Finally, fewer studies focused on other risk factors (22,28,29,32,34,38,43,45,(49)(50)(51)(52) (table 2).…”

“…The criteria used to select workplaces for the trials were clearly stated in 12 (12,13,17,22,26,28,29,31,35,36,38,51) of the 45 trials. The criteria used included number of workers (13,22,26,29,36), low turnover rates (31,36), high response rate at baseline (22), or acceptability of the program before the randomization process (11).…”

“…Methods for recruitment and the intensity of the recruitment process differed among the studies and included, for example, annual medical examination (8,14), letters or phone calls (12,13,15,17,22,38,39), and recruitment through group leaders or union representatives (11,29,50). Interventions can be classified according to delivering modalities.…”