Partnering Healthy@Work: an Australian university-government partnership facilitating policy-relevant research.

Research funding is increasingly supporting collaborations between knowledge users and researchers. Partnering Healthy@Work (pH@W), an inaugural recipient of funding through Australia's Partnership for Better Health Grants scheme, was a 5-year partnership between the Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania and the Tasmanian State Service (TSS). The partnerships purpose was to evaluate a comprehensive workplace health promotion programme (Healthy@Work) targeting 30 000 public sector employees; generating new knowledge and influencing workplace health promotion policy and decision-making. This mixed methods study evaluates the partnership between policy-makers and academics and identifies strategies that enabled pH@W to deliver key project outcomes. A pH@W document review was conducted, two partnership assessment tools completed and semi-structured interviews conducted with key policy-makers and academics. Analysis of the partnership assessment tools and interviews found that pH@W had reached a strong level of collaboration. Policy-relevant knowledge was generated about the health of TSS employees and their engagement with workplace health promotion. Knowledge exchange of a conceptual and instrumental nature occurred and was facilitated by the shared grant application, clear governance structures, joint planning, regular information exchange between researchers and policy-makers and research student placements in the TSS. Flexibility and acknowledgement of different priorities and perspectives of partner organizations were identified as critical factors for enabling effective partnership working and research relevance. Academic-policy-maker partnerships can be a powerful mechanism for improving policy relevance of research, but need to incorporate strategies that facilitate regular input from researchers and policy-makers in order to achieve this.

Does workplace health promotion contribute to job stress reduction? Three-year findings from Partnering Healthy@Work.

BACKGROUND: Workplace health promotion (WHP) has been proposed as a preventive intervention for job stress, possibly operating by promoting positive organizational culture or via programs promoting healthy lifestyles. The aim of this study was to investigate whether job stress changed over time in association with the availability of, and/or participation in a comprehensive WHP program (Healthy@Work). METHOD: This observational study was conducted in a diverse public sector organization (~28,000 employees). Using a repeated cross-sectional design with models corroborated using a cohort of repeat responders, self-report survey data were collected via a 40 % employee population random sample in 2010 (N = 3406) and 2013 (N = 3228). Outcomes assessed were effort and reward (self-esteem) components of the effort-reward imbalance (ERI) measure of job stress. Exposures were availability of, and participation in, comprehensive WHP. Linear mixed models and Poisson regression were used, with analyses stratified by sex and weighted for non-response. RESULTS: Higher WHP availability was positively associated with higher perceived self-esteem among women. Women's mean reward scores increased over time but were not statistically different (p > 0.05) after 3 years. For men, higher WHP participation was associated with lower perceived effort. Men's mean ERI increased over time. Results were supported in the cohort group. CONCLUSIONS: For women, comprehensive WHP availability contributed to a sense of organizational support, potentially impacting the esteem component of reward. Men with higher WHP participation also benefitted but gains were modest over time and may have been hindered by other work environment factors.

Prevalence and correlates of psychological distress in a large and diverse public sector workforce: baseline results from Partnering Healthy@Work.

BACKGROUND: Depressive and anxiety disorders are common among working adults and costly to employers and individuals. Mental health screening is often an important initial strategy, but the resultant data are often of unknown representativeness and difficult to interpret. In a public sector workforce, this study used a brief screener for depression/anxiety to: a) compare prevalence of high psychological distress obtained from a researcher survey with an employer survey and population norms and b) verify whether expected correlates were observed in a screening setting. METHODS: Participants were public servants working for an Australian state government. High psychological distress (Kessler-10 ≥22) stratified by age and sex was compared for a random weighted sample researcher survey (n = 3406) and an anonymous volunteer employer survey (n = 7715). Prevalence ratios (PR) were estimated from log binomial regression. RESULTS: Referencing the researcher survey, prevalence of high psychological distress was greater by age and sex in the employer survey but was only dependably higher for men when compared with population norms. Modelling suggested this may be due to work stress (effort-reward imbalance) (PR = 3.19, 95% CI 1.45-7.01) and casual/fixed-term employment (PR 2.64, 95% CI 1.26-5.56). CONCLUSIONS: Depression and anxiety screening using typical employer survey methods could overestimate prevalence but expected correlates are observed in a screening setting. Guidance for employers on screening and interpretation should be provided to encourage engagement with mental health prevention and treatment programs in the workplace.

Workplace Health Promotion and Mental Health: Three-Year Findings from Partnering Healthy@Work.

This study aimed to investigate the association between mental health and comprehensive workplace health promotion (WHP) delivered to an entire state public service workforce (~28,000 employees) over a three-year period. Government departments in a state public service were supported to design and deliver a comprehensive, multi-component health promotion program, Healthy@Work, which targeted modifiable health risks including unhealthy lifestyles and stress. Repeated cross-sectional surveys compared self-reported psychological distress (Kessler-10; K10) at commencement (N = 3406) and after 3 years (N = 3228). WHP availability and participation over time was assessed, and associations between the K10 and exposure to programs estimated. Analyses were repeated for a cohort subgroup (N = 580). Data were weighted for non-response. Participation in any mental health and lifestyle programs approximately doubled after 3 years. Both male and female employees with poorer mental health participated more often over time. Women's psychological distress decreased over time but this change was only partially attributable to participation in WHP, and only to lifestyle interventions. Average psychological distress did not change over time for men. Unexpectedly, program components directly targeting mental health were not associated with distress for either men or women. Cohort results corroborated findings. Healthy@Work was successful in increasing participation across a range of program types, including for men and women with poorer mental health. A small positive association of participation in lifestyle programs with mental health was observed for women but not men. The lack of association of mental health programs may have reflected program quality, its universality of application or other contextual factors.