This study assessed 11 determinants of health coaching program participation.
Design.
A cross-sectional study design used secondary data to assess the role of six employee-level and five worksite-level variables on telephone-based coaching enrollment, active participation, and completion.
Setting.
Data was provided by a national provider of worksite health promotion program services for employers.
Subjects.
A random sample of 34,291 employees from 52 companies was selected for inclusion in the study.
Measures.
Survey-based measures included age, gender, job type, health risk status, tobacco risk, social support, financial incentives, comprehensive communications, senior leadership support, cultural support, and comprehensive program design.
Analysis.
Gender-stratified multivariate logistic regression models were applied using backwards elimination procedures to yield parsimonious prediction models for each of the dependent variables.
Results.
Employees were more likely to enroll in coaching programs if they were older, female, and in poorer health, and if they were at worksites with fewer environmental supports for health, clear financial incentives for participation in coaching, more comprehensive communications, and more comprehensive programs. Once employees were enrolled, program completion was greater among those who were older, did not use tobacco, worked at a company with strong communications, and had fewer environmental supports for health.
Conclusion.
Both worksite-level and employee-level factors have significant influences on health coaching engagement, and there are gender differences in the strength of these predictors.
ClaxtonGGabelJRDiJulioB. Health benefits in 2008: Premiums moderately higher, while enrollment in consumer-directed plans rises in small firms. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27:w492–w502. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.27.26.w492.
2.
Hewitt Associates LLC. Two Roads Diverged: Hewitt's Annual Health Care Survey. Lincolnshire, Ill: Hewitt Associates, LLC; 2008.
3.
LinnanLABowlingMChildressJ. Results of the 2004 National Worksite Health Promotion Survey. Am J Public Health. 2008;98:1503–1509.
4.
PelletierKR. A review and analysis of the clinical and cost-effectiveness studies of comprehensive health promotion and disease management programs at the worksite: Update VI 2000–2004. J Occup Environ Med.2005;47:1051–1058.
5.
BaickerKCutlerDSongZ. Workplace wellness programs can generate savings. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29:304–311.
6.
SerxnerSNoeldnerSPGoldD. Best practices for an integrated population health management (PHM) program. Am J Health Promot. 2006;20(suppl):1–10, iii.
7.
GoetzelRZOzminkowskiRJ. The health and cost benefits of work site health-promotion programs. Annu Rev Public Health. 2008;29:303–323.
8.
GoetzelRZOzminkowskiRJAsciuttoAJ. Medstat Group I. Survey of Koop award winners: Life-cycle insights. Am J Health Promot. 2001;15(5):TAHP-1.
9.
GoetzelRZShechterDOzminkowskiRJ. Promising practices in employer health and productivity management efforts: Findings from a benchmarking study. J Occup Environ Med.2007;49:111–130.
10.
TerryPESeaversonELGrossmeierJAndersonDR. Association between nine quality components and superior worksite health management program results. J Occup Environ Med.2008;50:633–641.
11.
RobroekSJvan LentheFJvan EmpelenPBurdorfA. Determinants of participation in worksite health promotion programmes: A systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2009;6:26.
12.
GlasgowREMcCaulKDFisherKJ. Participation in worksite health promotion: A critique of the literature and recommendations for future practice. Health Educ Q.1993;20:391–408.
13.
LovatoCYGreenLW. Maintaining employee participation in workplace health promotion programs. Health Educ Q.1990;17:73–88.
14.
AndersonDRGrossmeierJSeaversonELSnyderD. The role of financial incentives in driving employee engagement in health management. ACSM Health Fitness J.2008;12:18–22.
15.
MartinezAVanWormerJPronkN. The role of incentives and communication on health assessment participation. ACSM Health Fitness J.2008;12:41.
16.
SeaversonELDGrossmeierJMillerTMAndersonDR. The role of incentive design, incentive value, communications strategy and worksite culture on health risk assessment participation. Am J Health Promot. 2009;23:343–352.
17.
TaitelMSHaufleVHeckD. Incentives and other factors associated with employee participation in health risk assessments. J Occup Environ Med.2008;50:863–872.
18.
WilhideCHayesJRFarahJR. The use and influence of employee incentives on participation and throughput in a telephonic disease management program. Popul Health Manag.2008;11:197–202.
19.
Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. The Future of the Public's Health in the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2003.
20.
SallisJFOwenN. Ecological models. In: GlanzKLewisFMRimerBK, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 2nd ed.San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass Inc; 1997:403–424.
21.
SAS Institute Inc.SAS/Stat 9.2 User's Guide: Introduction to Power and Sample Size Analysis. March 2008 ed. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc; 2008.
22.
StayWell Health Management. HealthPath Health Risk Assessment. Version 5.1. St. Paul, Minn: The StayWell Company; 1987.
23.
Health Enhancement Research Organization. Employee Health Management Best Practice Scorecard. Version 3. Edina, Minn: Health Enhancement Research Organization; 2009.
24.
TerryPESeaversonELDStaufackerMJGingerichSB. A comparison of the effectiveness of a telephone coaching program and a mail-based program. Health Educ Behav.2010;37:895–912.
25.
de VausDA. Surveys in Social Research. 5th ed.New York, NY: Routledge; 2002.
26.
AlexanderGLDivineGWCouperMP. Effect of incentives and mailing features on online health program enrollment. Am J Prev Med.2008;34:382–388.
27.
BrillPAKohlHWRogersT. The relationship between sociodemographic characteristics and recruitment, retention, and health improvements in a worksite health promotion program. Am J Health Promot. 1991;5:215–221.
28.
GatewoodJGLitchfieldRERyanSJ. Perceived barriers to community-based health promotion program participation. Am J Health Behav.2008;32:260–271.
29.
GroschJWAltermanTPetersenMRMurphyLR. Worksite health promotion programs in the U.S.: Factors associated with availability and participation. Am J Health Promot. 1998;13:36–45.
30.
LandoHAJefferyRWMcGovernPG. Effects of intensity of staff training on program participation in religious organizations and worksites. Am J Health Promot. 1993;8:3.
31.
TerryPEFowlesJBHarveyL. Employee engagement in factors that affect enrollment compared with retention in two coaching programs—the ACTIVATE study. Popul Health Manag.2010;13:115–122.
32.
CrumpCEEarpJALKozmaCMHertz-PicciottoI. Effect of organization-level variables on differential employee participation in 10 federal worksite health promotion programs. Health Educ Behav.1996;23:204–223.
33.
RostKConnellCSchechtmanK. Predictors of employee involvement in a worksite health promotion program. Health Educ Q.1990;17:395–407.
34.
SloanRPGrumanJC. Participation in workplace health promotion programs: The contribution of health and organizational factors. Health Educ Q.1988;15:269–288.
35.
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Title 1, Part 1, §2705 (2010).
36.
LewisRJHuebnerWWYarboroughCM3rd. Characteristics of participants and nonparticipants in worksite health promotion. Am J Health Promot. 1996;11:99–106.
