Cargando…

Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol

BACKGROUND: Large health inequalities exist in the Netherlands among individuals with a high compared to a low socioeconomic position. Worksite health promotion interventions are considered promising to reduce these inequalities, however, current interventions seem not to have the desired effects. T...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Heijster, Hanneke, van Berkel, Jantien, Abma, Tineke, Boot, Cécile R. L., de Vet, Emely
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7068920/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32164716
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-5020-2
_version_ 1783505671744913408
author van Heijster, Hanneke
van Berkel, Jantien
Abma, Tineke
Boot, Cécile R. L.
de Vet, Emely
author_facet van Heijster, Hanneke
van Berkel, Jantien
Abma, Tineke
Boot, Cécile R. L.
de Vet, Emely
author_sort van Heijster, Hanneke
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Large health inequalities exist in the Netherlands among individuals with a high compared to a low socioeconomic position. Worksite health promotion interventions are considered promising to reduce these inequalities, however, current interventions seem not to have the desired effects. This study proposes ‘moral case deliberation’, a form of stakeholder dialogue on moral dilemmas, as an integrated and inclusive intervention for worksite health promotion. This intervention takes into account three factors that are considered possible underlying causes of low effectiveness of current interventions, namely the lack of deliberate attention to: 1) the diverging values and interests of stakeholders in worksite health promotion, 2) the ethical issues of worksite health promotion, and 3) the connection with the lived experience (lifeworld) of lower SEP employees. Moral case deliberation will help to gain insight in the conflicting values in worksite health promotion, which contributes to the development of a vision for worksite health promotion that is supported by all parties. METHODS: The intervention will be evaluated through Responsive Evaluation, a form of participatory research. Key to Responsive Evaluation is that stakeholders are consulted to determine relevant changes as a result of the intervention. The intervention will be evaluated yearly at both fixed moments (baseline and annual evaluation(s)) and continuously. Mixed methods will be used, including interviews, participatory observations, analyses of HRM-data and short questionnaires. In addition, the intervention will be evaluated economically, on both monetary and non-monetary outcomes. DISCUSSION: This protocol proposes an innovative intervention and a novel participatory evaluation in the context of worksite health promotion. The study aims to gain understanding in how dialogue on moral dilemmas on health and health promotion can contribute to heightened personal and mutual understanding among stakeholders and practice improvements in the work context. By evaluating the intervention in more than one setting, findings of this study will provide knowledge about how MCD can be adapted to specific work settings and what changes it may lead to in these settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register (NRT): NL8051. Registration date: 28/09/2019, retrospectively registered. https://www.trialregister.nl/
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7068920
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70689202020-03-18 Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol van Heijster, Hanneke van Berkel, Jantien Abma, Tineke Boot, Cécile R. L. de Vet, Emely BMC Health Serv Res Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Large health inequalities exist in the Netherlands among individuals with a high compared to a low socioeconomic position. Worksite health promotion interventions are considered promising to reduce these inequalities, however, current interventions seem not to have the desired effects. This study proposes ‘moral case deliberation’, a form of stakeholder dialogue on moral dilemmas, as an integrated and inclusive intervention for worksite health promotion. This intervention takes into account three factors that are considered possible underlying causes of low effectiveness of current interventions, namely the lack of deliberate attention to: 1) the diverging values and interests of stakeholders in worksite health promotion, 2) the ethical issues of worksite health promotion, and 3) the connection with the lived experience (lifeworld) of lower SEP employees. Moral case deliberation will help to gain insight in the conflicting values in worksite health promotion, which contributes to the development of a vision for worksite health promotion that is supported by all parties. METHODS: The intervention will be evaluated through Responsive Evaluation, a form of participatory research. Key to Responsive Evaluation is that stakeholders are consulted to determine relevant changes as a result of the intervention. The intervention will be evaluated yearly at both fixed moments (baseline and annual evaluation(s)) and continuously. Mixed methods will be used, including interviews, participatory observations, analyses of HRM-data and short questionnaires. In addition, the intervention will be evaluated economically, on both monetary and non-monetary outcomes. DISCUSSION: This protocol proposes an innovative intervention and a novel participatory evaluation in the context of worksite health promotion. The study aims to gain understanding in how dialogue on moral dilemmas on health and health promotion can contribute to heightened personal and mutual understanding among stakeholders and practice improvements in the work context. By evaluating the intervention in more than one setting, findings of this study will provide knowledge about how MCD can be adapted to specific work settings and what changes it may lead to in these settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register (NRT): NL8051. Registration date: 28/09/2019, retrospectively registered. https://www.trialregister.nl/ BioMed Central 2020-03-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7068920/ /pubmed/32164716 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-5020-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
van Heijster, Hanneke
van Berkel, Jantien
Abma, Tineke
Boot, Cécile R. L.
de Vet, Emely
Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol
title Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol
title_full Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol
title_fullStr Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol
title_full_unstemmed Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol
title_short Responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of SEP related health inequalities: a study protocol
title_sort responsive evaluation of stakeholder dialogue as a worksite health promotion intervention to contribute to the reduction of sep related health inequalities: a study protocol
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7068920/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32164716
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-5020-2
work_keys_str_mv AT vanheijsterhanneke responsiveevaluationofstakeholderdialogueasaworksitehealthpromotioninterventiontocontributetothereductionofseprelatedhealthinequalitiesastudyprotocol
AT vanberkeljantien responsiveevaluationofstakeholderdialogueasaworksitehealthpromotioninterventiontocontributetothereductionofseprelatedhealthinequalitiesastudyprotocol
AT abmatineke responsiveevaluationofstakeholderdialogueasaworksitehealthpromotioninterventiontocontributetothereductionofseprelatedhealthinequalitiesastudyprotocol
AT bootcecilerl responsiveevaluationofstakeholderdialogueasaworksitehealthpromotioninterventiontocontributetothereductionofseprelatedhealthinequalitiesastudyprotocol
AT devetemely responsiveevaluationofstakeholderdialogueasaworksitehealthpromotioninterventiontocontributetothereductionofseprelatedhealthinequalitiesastudyprotocol