Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McMahon, A.
Right arrow Articles by Duffy, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McMahon, A.
Right arrow Articles by Duffy, E.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Health Promotion International, Vol. 17, No. 4, 297-308, December 2002
© Oxford University Press 2002

Evaluation of a workplace cardiovascular health promotion programme in the Republic of Ireland

Ann McMahon, Cecily C. Kelleher, Geraldine Helly and Elaine Duffy

Centre for Health Promotion Studies, Department of Health Promotion, Clinical Sciences Institute, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland

Address for correspondence: Cecily C. Kelleher Centre for Health Promotion Studies Department of Health Promotion Clinical Sciences Institute National University of Ireland Galway Ireland E-mail: cecily.kelleher{at}nuigalway.ie

This paper describes a comprehensive evaluation of the organizational impact of a workplace health promotion programme, in the context of a framework devised by Nutbeam in 1998. The Happy Heart at Work programme, sponsored by the Irish Heart Foundation, has been in existence for 10 years and aims to promote a healthy lifestyle through specially devised modular materials. A postal census survey of 785 valid registered sites expressing any level of initial interest in the programme yielded a 40% response rate (n = 311). Of these, 194 (63%) were currently active and 114 were not. Active organizations were less likely to be Irish owned (54.5% versus 71.4%, p < 0.05), and more likely to operate in shifts (72.3% versus 51.1%, p < 0.05) or to have an occupational physician amongst the staff (36.9% versus 31%). Programme impact within active organizations, based on pre-defined Health Promoting Workplace parameters, was documented. There was agreement in the questionnaire responses that participating organizations promote a smoke-free environment (mean rating on five-point scale = 4.42), employee health and well-being (4.21) and good nutritional practice (4.11). Triangulation of research methods, including a telephone survey of gatekeepers from within organizations (n = 18), focus groups with participant employees (n = 42) and a review of the staff opinions of the facilitating organization on the programme, all showed strong concordance with respect to the strengths and weaknesses of Happy Heart at Work. The programme was felt to help improve employees’ lifestyle habits and morale, as well as the company’s public image. The main drawbacks of the programme were its relatively low profile, even in actively participating organizations, and the fact that it was not seen to be independently sustainable without intensive and ongoing support.

Key words: cardiovascular health promotion; programme evaluation; workplace health promotion


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.