Hands4U:the effects of a multifaceted implementation strategy on hand eczema prevalence in a healthcare setting. Results of a randomized controlled trial

Background. Healthcare workers have an increased risk of developing hand eczema. A multifaceted implementation strategy was developed to implement a guideline to prevent hand eczema among healthcare workers.Objectives. To investigate the effects of the implementation strategy on self-reported hand eczema and preventive behaviour.Methods. A randomized controlled trial was performed. A total of 48 departments (n = 1649) were randomly allocated to the multifaceted implementation strategy or the control group. The strategy consisted of education, participatory working groups, and role models. Outcome measures were self-reported hand eczema and preventive behaviour. Data were collected at baseline, and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months of follow-up.Results. Participants in the intervention group were significantly more likely to report hand eczema [odds ratio (OR) 1.45; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-2.04], and they reported significantly less hand washing (B, -0.38; 95% CI: -0.48 to -0.27), reported significantly more frequent use of a moisturizer (B, 0.30; 95% CI: 0.22-0.39) and were more likely to report wearing cotton undergloves (OR 6.33; 95% CI: 3.23-12.41) than participants in the control group 12 months after baseline.Conclusions. The strategy implemented can be used in practice, as it showed positive effects on preventive behaviour. More research is needed to investigate the unexpected effects on hand eczema.</p

Work characteristics and determinants of job satisfaction in four age groups: university employees’ point of view

Contains fulltext : 79843.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)PURPOSE: To investigate (a) differences in work characteristics and (b) determinants of job satisfaction among employees in different age groups. METHODS: A cross-sectional questionnaire was filled in by 1,112 university employees, classified into four age groups. (a) Work characteristics were analysed with ANOVA while adjusting for sex and job classification. (b) Job satisfaction was regressed against job demands and job resources adapted from the Job Demands-Resources model. Results : Statistically significant differences concerning work characteristics between age groups are present, but rather small. Regression analyses revealed that negative association of the job demands workload and conflicts at work with job satisfaction faded by adding job resources. Job resources were most correlated with more job satisfaction, especially more skill discretion and more relations with colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: Skill discretion and relations with colleagues are major determinants of job satisfaction. However, attention should also be given to conflicts at work, support from supervisor and opportunities for further education, because the mean scores of these work characteristics were disappointing in almost all age groups. The latter two characteristics were found to be associated significantly to job satisfaction in older workers

Process evaluation of the ‘Grip on Health’ intervention in general and occupational health practice

Abstract Background For working patients with a lower socioeconomic position, health complaints often result from a combination of problems on multiple life domains. To prevent long-term health complaints and absence from work, it is crucial for general and occupational health professionals to adopt a broad perspective on health and to collaborate when necessary. This study aimed to evaluate how the ‘Grip on Health’ intervention is implemented in general and occupational health practice to address multi-domain problems and to promote interprofessional collaboration. Method A process evaluation was performed among 28 general and occupational health professionals, who were trained and implemented the Grip on Health intervention during a six-month period. The ‘Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations’ was used to evaluate facilitators and barriers for implementing Grip on Health. Data included three group interviews with 17 professionals, a questionnaire and five individual interviews. Results While most health professionals were enthusiastic about the Grip on Health intervention, its implementation was hindered by contextual factors. Barriers in the socio-political context consisted of legal rules and regulations around sickness and disability, professional protocols for interprofessional collaboration, and the Covid-19 pandemic. On the organizational level, lack of consultation time was the main barrier. Facilitators were found on the level of the intervention and the health professional. For instance, professionals described how the intervention supports addressing multi-domain problems and has created awareness of work in each other’s healthcare domain. They recognized the relevance of the intervention for a broad target group and experienced benefits of its use. The intervention period was, nevertheless, too short to determine the outcomes of Grip on Health. Conclusion The Grip on Health intervention can be used to address problems on multiple life domains and to stimulate interprofessional collaboration. Visualizing multi-domain problems appeared especially helpful to guide patients with a lower socioeconomic position, and a joint training of general and occupational health professionals promoted their mutual awareness and familiarity. For a wider implementation, stakeholders on all levels, including the government and professional associations, should reflect on ways to address contextual barriers to promote a broad perspective on health as well as on collaborative work

Process evaluation of the ‘Grip on Health’ intervention in general and occupational health practice

Background: For working patients with a lower socioeconomic position, health complaints often result from a combination of problems on multiple life domains. To prevent long-term health complaints and absence from work, it is crucial for general and occupational health professionals to adopt a broad perspective on health and to collaborate when necessary. This study aimed to evaluate how the ‘Grip on Health’ intervention is implemented in general and occupational health practice to address multi-domain problems and to promote interprofessional collaboration. Method: A process evaluation was performed among 28 general and occupational health professionals, who were trained and implemented the Grip on Health intervention during a six-month period. The ‘Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations’ was used to evaluate facilitators and barriers for implementing Grip on Health. Data included three group interviews with 17 professionals, a questionnaire and five individual interviews. Results: While most health professionals were enthusiastic about the Grip on Health intervention, its implementation was hindered by contextual factors. Barriers in the socio-political context consisted of legal rules and regulations around sickness and disability, professional protocols for interprofessional collaboration, and the Covid-19 pandemic. On the organizational level, lack of consultation time was the main barrier. Facilitators were found on the level of the intervention and the health professional. For instance, professionals described how the intervention supports addressing multi-domain problems and has created awareness of work in each other’s healthcare domain. They recognized the relevance of the intervention for a broad target group and experienced benefits of its use. The intervention period was, nevertheless, too short to determine the outcomes of Grip on Health. Conclusion: The Grip on Health intervention can be used to address problems on multiple life domains and to stimulate interprofessional collaboration. Visualizing multi-domain problems appeared especially helpful to guide patients with a lower socioeconomic position, and a joint training of general and occupational health professionals promoted their mutual awareness and familiarity. For a wider implementation, stakeholders on all levels, including the government and professional associations, should reflect on ways to address contextual barriers to promote a broad perspective on health as well as on collaborative work

Common prognostic factors of work disability among employees with a chronic somatic disease: a systematic review of cohort studies

Objective Based on prospective and retrospective disease cohort studies, the aim of this review was to determine common prognostic factors for work disability among employees with rheumatoid arthritis, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, and ischemic heart disease (IHD). Methods A systematic literature search in Medline (1990-2008) and Embase (1990-2008) was carried out to identify relevant cohort studies using a well-defined list of inclusion and quality criteria. Results We identified 43 relevant cohort studies with sufficient methodological quality (20 for rheumatoid arthritis, 3 for asthma and 20 for IHD)). The common prognostic factors for work disability found in all the diseases were: perceived health complaints, limitation in daily physical activities caused by the disease (high versus low), heavy manual work, and female gender. The common positive prognostic factors for rheumatoid arthritis and IHD were age (high versus low) and sickness absence. The common negative factors for rheumatoid arthritis and IHD were education (high versus low) and ethnic origin (white versus non-white). Conclusions As many prognostic factors for work disability are similar for employees with various chronic diseases, it is possible to detect high risk groups. This information supports the development and implementation of a general disability management intervention for employees suffering from a chronic disease to overcome health-related limitations at wor

Implementation of Recommendations for Hand Eczema Through a Multifaceted Strategy. A Process Evaluation Among Health Care Workers

Process data give important insights into how an intervention is implemented. The aim of the present study is to conduct a process evaluation, alongside a randomised controlled trail, on the implementation of recommendations for the prevention of hand eczema. The intervention was carried out in healthcare workers' departments and consisted of working groups and role models. The role models were selected based on their representativeness, their influence on colleagues, and their motivation. The focus of the working group was to implement recommendations for hand eczema at the department by choosing solutions to overcome barriers for implementation. Out of the 104 solutions, 87 were realised. Solutions regarding moisturisers and use of cotton under gloves, were used by 90.9% and 30.8% of the employees, respectively. Of all participants, 58.2% actively engaged with the role models. This process evaluation showed that the intervention was executed according to protocol and that the solutions were implemented well. However, the role model component in the intervention should be improved

Screening manual and office workers for risk of long-term sickness absence: Cut-off points for the Work Ability Index

Objectives The aim of this study was to investigate the Work Ability Index (WAI) as a tool to screen for risk of different durations of long-term sickness absence (LTSA) among manual and office workers. Methods The prospective study comprised a cohort of 3049 (1710 manual and 1339 office) workers participating in occupational health surveys between 2010-2012. The survey date was set as baseline and incident LTSA episodes of different duration (> 14, > 28, > 42, > 60, and > 90 days) were retrieved from an occupational health register in the year following the survey. Baseline WAI scores were associated with LTSA episodes occurring (no/yes) during one-year follow-up by logistic regression analysis in a random sample (N=1000) of the cohort. Predictions of LTSA risk were then validated among the workers not included in the random sample. Results The odds of LTSA episodes at follow-up decreased with increasing baseline WAI scores (ie, better work ability). The WAI accurately predicted the risk of future LTSA episodes > 28, > 42, > 60 days, but over-predicted the risk of LTSA episodes > 14 and > 90 days. The WAI discriminated between workers at high and low risk of LTSA episodes of all durations. Office workers had higher WAI scores than manual workers. Consequently, false-negative rates were higher among office workers and false-positive rates were higher among manual workers at each WAI cut-off point. Conclusion The WAI could be used to screen both manual and office workers for risk of LTSA episodes lasting > 28, > 42, > 60 days. WAI cut-off points depend on the objectives of screening and may differ for manual and office workers