Well-being at Work: Research Into Happiness at Work

NCT05660330 | Recruiting

• 1 other identifier: BC10608
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 2,000
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Organizations are becoming increasingly aware that employees are an important factor in gaining and maintaining competitive advantage. Based on the current evidence, a holistic approach, in which different well-being factors and different levels are addressed simultaneously, is needed. However, given the scarcity of this approach in studies, a significant gap in knowledge is demonstrated. This paper tries to address these shortcomings. A partially randomised preference trials design is used to evaluate the impact of an intervention package that focusses on both the individual and organizational level and addresses 3 different domains to improve well-being: psychosocial, ergonomic and lifestyle. The data collection of the research outcomes will be conducted at several points in time. Therefore, a online self-administered questionnaire is developed en will be administered before the start of the intervention. Six and twelve months after the intervention, the short and long term impact of the intervention will be measured. The intervention itself consists of a basic intervention package that will be spread over 3 different days that take place over a time period of maximum 2 weeks. Between 20 and 30 companies will be recruited from a data pool with clients from the Flemish side of Belgium. The sample size of the participating employees should be at least 2000. A stratified random sampling method will be used based on sector type while company size (small-medium-large) will be taken into account

Conditions

Well-being at Work

Keywords

Well-being at work; Work-engagement; Workplace intervention; Holistic; Tailor-made

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (3)

• Engagement

  Change in self-reported Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (9 items) from baseline measurement to follow-up measurements at 6 and 12 months

  Change from baseline to post-interventional measurement at 6 and 12 months

• Jobsatisfaction

  Change in self-reported Jobsatisfaction (1 item) from baseline measurement to follow-up measurements at 6 and 12 months

  Change from baseline to post-interventional measurement at 6 and 12 months

• Commitment

  Change in self-reported COPSOQ subscale 'Commitment' (5 items) from baseline measurement to follow-up measurements at 6 and 12 months

  Change from baseline to post-interventional measurement at 6 and 12 months

Secondary Outcomes (4)

• Life satisfaction

  Change from baseline to post-interventional measurement at 6 and 12 months

• Affect

  Change from baseline to post-interventional measurement at 6 and 12 months

• Basic needs

  Change from baseline to post-interventional measurement at 6 and 12 months

• Burnout

  Change from baseline to post-interventional measurement at 6 and 12 months

Study Arms (2)

Holistic semi-tailormade well-being (intervention) group

EXPERIMENTAL

They receive the holistic semi-tailormade intervention, consisting of training and workshops in three well-being domains: psychosocial, ergonomic and lifestyle. In addition to this intervention, they still receive their standard interventions

Behavioral: Holistic semi-tailormade well-being intervention

Standard well-being (control) group

NO INTERVENTION

At first, they receive standard well-being interventions. After six or twelve months, this group can participate in the holistic semi-tailormade well-being intervention.

Interventions

Holistic semi-tailormade well-being intervention BEHAVIORAL

The holistic well-being intervention consists of a mandatory basic package that will take 2 half days and 1 full day to complete. In the first half day, the conclusion of the baseline measurement will be discussed, as well as the specific outline of the well-being thay. On the well-being day, three trained professionals from an HR service company, called Liantis, will guide these interventions (consisting of training and workshops) in the workplace. Only a small proportion of the company employees, called the ambassadors, will attend the well-being day. In the second half day, the ambassadors will be coached to disseminate the obtained information to the entire workplace. This information will be personalized according to the problems, needs and context of each company. Besides the basic package, an optional expertise package will be offered during this second half day. In the period afterwards, the ambassadors are followed every 2 months by means of a semi-structured interview.

Holistic semi-tailormade well-being (intervention) group

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years - 75 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Sufficient knowledge in one of the languages (Dutch, French, English)

Sponsors & Collaborators

• University Ghent: lead
• Liantis: collaborator

Study Sites (1)

Ghent University

Ghent, 9000, Belgium

RECRUITING

Related Publications (32)

• Abdin S, Welch RK, Byron-Daniel J, Meyrick J. The effectiveness of physical activity interventions in improving well-being across office-based workplace settings: a systematic review. Public Health. 2018 Jul;160:70-76. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2018.03.029. Epub 2018 May 16.

  PMID: 29751224 BACKGROUND

• Ahn S, Chung JW, Crane MK, Bassett DR Jr, Anderson JG. The Effects of Multi-Domain Interventions on Cognition: A Systematic Review. West J Nurs Res. 2022 Dec;44(12):1134-1154. doi: 10.1177/01939459211032272. Epub 2021 Jul 14.

  PMID: 34261376 BACKGROUND

• Frogeli E, Rudman A, Ljotsson B, Gustavsson P. Preventing stress-related ill health among newly registered nurses by supporting engagement in proactive behaviors: development and feasibility testing of a behavior change intervention. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2018 Jan 8;4:28. doi: 10.1186/s40814-017-0219-7. eCollection 2018.

  PMID: 29321942 BACKGROUND

• Di Fabio A. The Psychology of Sustainability and Sustainable Development for Well-Being in Organizations. Front Psychol. 2017 Sep 19;8:1534. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01534. eCollection 2017.

  PMID: 28974935 BACKGROUND

• Nielsen, K., Nielsen, M. B., Ogbonnaya, C., Känsälä, M., Saari, E., & Isaksson, K. (2017). Workplace resources to improve both employee well-being and performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Work & Stress, 31(2), 101-120.

  BACKGROUND

• Bakker, A. B., & Albrecht, S. (2018). Work engagement: current trends. Career Development International.

  BACKGROUND

• Garcia-Buades ME, Peiro JM, Montanez-Juan MI, Kozusznik MW, Ortiz-Bonnin S. Happy-Productive Teams and Work Units: A Systematic Review of the 'Happy-Productive Worker Thesis'. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Dec 20;17(1):69. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17010069.

  PMID: 31861812 BACKGROUND

• Bailey, C., Madden, A., Alfes, K., & Fletcher, L. (2017). The meaning, antecedents and outcomes of employee engagement: A narrative synthesis. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(1), 31-53.

  BACKGROUND

• Tandler N, Krauss A, Proyer RT. Authentic Happiness at Work: Self- and Peer-Rated Orientations to Happiness, Work Satisfaction, and Stress Coping. Front Psychol. 2020 Aug 7;11:1931. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01931. eCollection 2020.

  PMID: 32849134 BACKGROUND

• Kivimaki M, Kawachi I. Work Stress as a Risk Factor for Cardiovascular Disease. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2015 Sep;17(9):630. doi: 10.1007/s11886-015-0630-8.

  PMID: 26238744 BACKGROUND

• Vanhove, A. J., Herian, M. N., Perez, A. L., Harms, P. D., & Lester, P. B. (2016). Can resilience be developed at work? A meta-analytic review of resilience-building programme effectiveness. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 89(2), 278-307.

  BACKGROUND

• Awa WL, Plaumann M, Walter U. Burnout prevention: a review of intervention programs. Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Feb;78(2):184-90. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.04.008. Epub 2009 May 20.

  PMID: 19467822 BACKGROUND

• Chu AH, Ng SH, Tan CS, Win AM, Koh D, Muller-Riemenschneider F. A systematic review and meta-analysis of workplace intervention strategies to reduce sedentary time in white-collar workers. Obes Rev. 2016 May;17(5):467-81. doi: 10.1111/obr.12388. Epub 2016 Mar 15.

  PMID: 26990220 BACKGROUND

• Isham, A., Mair, S., & Jackson, T. (2020). Wellbeing and productivity: a review of the literature.

  BACKGROUND

• Pieper C, Schroer S, Eilerts AL. Evidence of Workplace Interventions-A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Sep 23;16(19):3553. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16193553.

  PMID: 31547516 BACKGROUND

• Grant, A. M. (2012). ROI is a poor measure of coaching success: towards a more holistic approach using a well-being and engagement framework. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 5(2), 74-85.

  BACKGROUND

• Shi Y, Sears LE, Coberley CR, Pope JE. The association between modifiable well-being risks and productivity: a longitudinal study in pooled employer sample. J Occup Environ Med. 2013 Apr;55(4):353-64. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0b013e3182851923.

  PMID: 23567993 BACKGROUND

• Noar SM, Benac CN, Harris MS. Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. Psychol Bull. 2007 Jul;133(4):673-93. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.673.

  PMID: 17592961 BACKGROUND

• De Cocker K, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Cardon G, Vandelanotte C. The Effectiveness of a Web-Based Computer-Tailored Intervention on Workplace Sitting: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Med Internet Res. 2016 May 31;18(5):e96. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5266.

  PMID: 27245789 BACKGROUND

• Lustria ML, Noar SM, Cortese J, Van Stee SK, Glueckauf RL, Lee J. A meta-analysis of web-delivered tailored health behavior change interventions. J Health Commun. 2013;18(9):1039-69. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2013.768727. Epub 2013 Jun 10.

  PMID: 23750972 BACKGROUND

• Brewin CR, Bradley C. Patient preferences and randomised clinical trials. BMJ. 1989 Jul 29;299(6694):313-5. doi: 10.1136/bmj.299.6694.313. No abstract available.

  PMID: 2504416 BACKGROUND

• Ivandic I, Freeman A, Birner U, Nowak D, Sabariego C. A systematic review of brief mental health and well-being interventions in organizational settings. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2017 Mar 1;43(2):99-108. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.3616. Epub 2017 Jan 2.

  PMID: 28042963 BACKGROUND

• Varekamp I, van Dijk FJ. Workplace problems and solutions for employees with chronic diseases. Occup Med (Lond). 2010 Jun;60(4):287-93. doi: 10.1093/occmed/kqq078.

  PMID: 20511269 BACKGROUND

• Woodhouse E, Homewood KM, Beauchamp E, Clements T, McCabe JT, Wilkie D, Milner-Gulland EJ. Guiding principles for evaluating the impacts of conservation interventions on human well-being. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2015 Nov 5;370(1681):20150103. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2015.0103.

  PMID: 26460137 BACKGROUND

• Knight C, Patterson M, Dawson J. Building work engagement: A systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions. J Organ Behav. 2017 Jul;38(6):792-812. doi: 10.1002/job.2167. Epub 2016 Dec 13.

  PMID: 28781428 BACKGROUND

• Astrella JA. Return on Investment: Evaluating the Evidence Regarding Financial Outcomes of Workplace Wellness Programs. J Nurs Adm. 2017 Jul/Aug;47(7-8):379-383. doi: 10.1097/NNA.0000000000000499.

  PMID: 28727623 BACKGROUND

• Montano D, Hoven H, Siegrist J. Effects of organisational-level interventions at work on employees' health: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2014 Feb 8;14:135. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-135.

  PMID: 24507447 BACKGROUND

• Knight, C., Patterson, M., & Dawson, J. (2019). Work engagement interventions can be effective: a systematic review. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(3), 348-372.

  BACKGROUND

• DeChant PF, Acs A, Rhee KB, Boulanger TS, Snowdon JL, Tutty MA, Sinsky CA, Thomas Craig KJ. Effect of Organization-Directed Workplace Interventions on Physician Burnout: A Systematic Review. Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes. 2019 Sep 26;3(4):384-408. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2019.07.006. eCollection 2019 Dec.

  PMID: 31993558 BACKGROUND

• Hoek RJA, Havermans BM, Houtman ILD, Brouwers EPM, Heerkens YF, Zijlstra-Vlasveld MC, Anema JR, van der Beek AJ, Boot CRL. Stress Prevention@Work: a study protocol for the evaluation of a multifaceted integral stress prevention strategy to prevent employee stress in a healthcare organization: a cluster controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2017 Jul 17;18(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4585-0.

  PMID: 28716117 BACKGROUND

• Kröll, C., Doebler, P., & Nüesch, S. (2017). Meta-analytic evidence of the effectiveness of stress management at work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(5), 677-693.

  BACKGROUND

• Proper KI, van Oostrom SH. The effectiveness of workplace health promotion interventions on physical and mental health outcomes - a systematic review of reviews. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2019 Nov 1;45(6):546-559. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.3833. Epub 2019 May 28.

  PMID: 31134284 BACKGROUND

Study Officials

• Lutgart Braeckman

  University Ghent

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

• Lieven Annemans

  University Ghent

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Central Study Contacts

Eline De Poortere

CONTACT

+32475702806; eline.dp@hotmail.com

Sophie Vandepitte

CONTACT

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: PREVENTION
• Intervention Model: FACTORIAL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: November 30, 2022
• First Posted: December 21, 2022
• Study Start: April 1, 2022
• Primary Completion: August 31, 2024
• Study Completion: August 31, 2024
• Last Updated: April 12, 2024

Record last verified: 2024-04

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

BE (1)