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).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFResearch 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.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBackground: 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).
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.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF