Development and Fidelity Testing of the Test@Work Digital Toolkit for Employers on Workplace Health Checks and Opt-In HIV Testing

Holly Blake, Sarah Somerset, Catrin Evans, Holly Blake, Sarah Somerset, Catrin Evans

Abstract

Background: In the UK, few employers offer general health checks for employees, and opt-in HIV testing is rarely included. There is a need to provide evidence-based guidance and support for employers around health checks and HIV testing in the workplace. An Agile approach was used to develop and evaluate a digital toolkit to facilitate employers' understanding about workplace health screening.

Methods: The Test@Work toolkit development included an online survey (STAGE 1: n = 201), stakeholder consultation (STAGE 2: n = 19), expert peer review (STAGE 3: n = 24), and pilot testing (STAGE 4: n = 20). The toolkit includes employer guidance on workplace health promotion, workplace health screening, and confidential opt-in HIV testing with signposting to resources. Pilot testing included assessment of fidelity (delivery and engagement) and implementation qualities (attitudes, resources, practicality, acceptability, usability and cost).

Results: STAGE 1: The vast majority of respondents would consider offering general health checks in the workplace that included confidential opt-in HIV testing, and this view was broadly comparable across organisation types (n = 201; public: 87.8%; private: 89.7%; third: 87.1%). STAGES 2 and 3: Stakeholders highlighted essential content considerations: (1) inclusion of the business case for workplace health initiatives, (2) clear pathways to employer responsibilities, and (3) presenting HIV-related information alongside other areas of health. With regards presentation, stakeholders proposed that the toolkit should be concise, with clear signposting and be hosted on a trusted portal. STAGE 4: Employers were satisfied with the toolkit content, usability and utility. The toolkit had high fidelity with regards to delivery and employer engagement. Assessment of implementation qualities showed high usability and practicality, with low perceived burden for completion and acceptable cost implications. Very few resource challenges were reported, and the toolkit was considered to be appropriate for any type of organisation, irrespective of size or resources.

Conclusions: Employers perceived the Test@Work toolkit to be useful, meaningful and appropriate for their needs. This digital resource could be used to support employers to engage with health screening and opt-in HIV testing within the context of workplace health promotion.

Keywords: HIV; health promotion; occupational health; technology.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Stakeholder consultation activities.

References

    1. Burton J. WHO Healthy Workplace Framework and Model: Background and Supporting Literature and Practice. World Health Organisation; Geneva, Switzerland: 2010. [(accessed on 12 December 2019)]. Available online: .
    1. Jepson R.G., Harris F.M., Platt S., Tannahill C. The effectiveness of interventions to change six health behaviours: A review of reviews. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:538–554. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-538.
    1. PriceWaterHouse Coopers . Building the Case for Wellness. PriceWaterHouse Coopers; London, UK: 2008. [(accessed on 12 December 2019)]. Available online: .
    1. Secommbe I., Fenton K. Health, Work and Health Related Worklessness: A Guide for Local Authorities. Public Health England; London, UK: 2016. [(accessed on 10 May 2016)]. Available online: .
    1. Pieper C., Schröer S., Eilerts A.L. Evidence of Workplace Interventions-A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2019;16:3553. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16193553.
    1. Jones D., Molitor D., Reif J. What do Workplace Wellness Programs do? Evidence from the Illinois Workplace Wellness Study. Q. J. Econ. 2019;134:1747–1791. doi: 10.1093/qje/qjz023.
    1. Blake H., Zhou D., Batt M.E. Five-year workplace wellness intervention in the NHS. Perspect. Public Health. 2013;133:262–271. doi: 10.1177/1757913913489611.
    1. Blake H., Bennett E., EBatt M. Evaluation of occupational health checks for hospital employees. IJWHM. 2014;7:247–266. doi: 10.1108/IJWHM-07-2013-0027.
    1. Shain M., Kramer D.M. Health promotion in the workplace: framing the concept; reviewing the evidence. Occup. Environ. Med. 2004;61:643–648. doi: 10.1136/oem.2004.013193.
    1. EASHW (European Agency for Safety and Health at Work) Workplace Health Promotion for Employees. [(accessed on 12 December 2019)];Fact Sheet. 2010 :94. Available online: .
    1. Shamu S., Farirai T., Kuwanda L., Slabbert J., Guloba G., Khupakonke S., Johnson S., Masihleho N., Kamera J., Nkhwashu N. Comparison of community-based HIV counselling and testing (CBCT) through index client tracing and other modalities: Outcomes in 13 South African high HIV prevalence districts by gender and age. PLoS ONE. 2019;14:e0221215. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221215.
    1. Weihs M., Meyer-Weitz A. Barriers to workplace HIV testing in South Africa: A systematic review of the literature. AIDS Care. 2016;28:495–499. doi: 10.1080/09540121.2015.1109586.
    1. Ishimaru T., Wada K., Smith D.R. HIV testing and attitudes among the working-age population of Japan: Annual health checkups may offer an effective way forwards. Ind. Health. 2016;54:116–122. doi: 10.2486/indhealth.2015-0087.
    1. Gourlay A.J., Pharris A.M., Noori T., Supervie V., Rosinska M., Ard van S., Touloumi G., Porter K. Towards standardized definitions for monitoring the continuum of HIV care in Europe. AIDS. 2017;31:2053–2058. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000001597.
    1. Nash S.G., Furegato M., Gill O.N., Connor N. HIV Testing in England: 2017 Report. Public Health England; London, UK: 2017.
    1. Blake H., Banerjee A., Evans C. Employer attitudes towards general health checks and HIV testing in the workplace. Public Health. 2018;156:34–43. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2017.12.004.
    1. Blake H., Hussain B., Hand J., Juma AEvans C. Employers’ views of the ‘Healthy Hub Roadshow’: A workplace HIV testing intervention in England. AIDS Care Psychol. Socio-Med. Asp. AIDS/HIV. 2018;20:1–5. doi: 10.1080/09540121.2018.1500010.
    1. Blake H., Hussain B., Hand J., Juma A., Rowlands D., Evans C. Healthy Hub Roadshow: Employee perceptions of a workplace HIV testing intervention. IJWHM. 2018;11:333–348. doi: 10.1108/IJWHM-03-2018-0030.
    1. Alvarez-Del Arco D., Fakoya I., Thomadakis C., Pantazis N., Touloumi G., Gennotte A.F., Zuure F., Barros H., Staehelin C., Göpel S., et al. Advancing Migrant Access to Health Services in Europe (aMASE) study team, High levels of postmigration HIV acquisition within nine European countries. AIDS. 2017;31:1979–1988. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000001571.
    1. Kharsany A.B.M., Karim Q.A. HIV infection and AIDS in Sub-Saharan Africa: Current status, challenges and opportunities. Open AIDS J. 2016;10:34–48. doi: 10.2174/1874613601610010034.
    1. Poder A., Haldre M. HIV in Europe. Clin. Dermatol. 2014;32:282–285. doi: 10.1016/j.clindermatol.2013.08.011.
    1. Carolan S., Harris P.R., Cavanagh K. Improving Employee Well-Being and Effectiveness: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Web-Based Psychological Interventions Delivered in the Workplace. J. Med. Internet Res. 2017;19:e271. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7583.
    1. Ryan C., Bergin M., Chalder T., Wells J.S. Web-based interventions for the management of stress in the workplace: Focus, form, and efficacy. J. Occup. Health. 2017;59:215–236. doi: 10.1539/joh.16-0227-RA.
    1. Kerr D.C., Ornelas I.J., Lilly M.M., Calhoun R., Meischke H. Participant Engagement in and Perspectives on a Web-Based Mindfulness Intervention for 9-1-1 Telecommunicators: Multimethod Study. J. Med. Internet Res. 2019;21:e13449. doi: 10.2196/13449.
    1. Deitz D., Cook R.F., Hersch R.K., Leaf S. Heart healthy online: an innovative approach to risk reduction in the workplace. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2014;56:547–553. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000148.
    1. Colkesen E.B., Niessen M.A., Peek N., Vosbergen S., Kraaijenhagen R.A., van Kalken C.K., Tijssen J.G., Peters R.J. Initiation of health-behaviour change among employees participating in a web-based health risk assessment with tailored feedback. J. Occup. Med. Toxicol. 2011;6:5. doi: 10.1186/1745-6673-6-5.
    1. De Cocker K., Cardon G., Vergeer I., Radtke T., Vandelanotte C. Who Uses Action Planning in a Web-Based Computer-Tailored Intervention to Reduce Workplace Sitting and What do Action Plans Look Like? Analyses of the Start to stand Intervention among Flemish Employees. Appl. Psychol. Health Well Being. 2019;11:543–561. doi: 10.1111/aphw.12167.
    1. Healy G.N., Eakin E.G., Winkler E.A., Hadgraft N., Dunstan D.W., Gilson N.D., Goode A.D. Assessing the Feasibility and Pre-Post Impact Evaluation of the Beta (Test) Version of the BeUpstanding Champion Toolkit in Reducing Workplace Sitting: Pilot Study. JMIR Form. Res. 2018;2:e17. doi: 10.2196/formative.9343.
    1. Compernolle S., Vandelanotte C., Cardon G., De Bourdeaudhuij I., De Cocker K. Effectiveness of a web-based, computer-tailored, pedometer-based physical activity intervention for adults: a cluster randomized controlled trial. J. Med. Internet Res. 2015;17:e38. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3402.
    1. De Bourdeaudhuij I., Stevens V., Vandelanotte C., Brug J. Evaluation of an interactive computer-tailored nutrition intervention in a real-life setting. Ann. Behav. Med. 2007;33:39–48. doi: 10.1207/s15324796abm3301_5.
    1. Montagni I., Dehman A., Yu Z., Martinez M.J., Banner S., Rimbert S., Hayez S., Foster C., Fontvieille A.M. Effectiveness of a Blended Web-Based Intervention to Raise Sleep Awareness at Workplace: The WarmUapp™ Pilot Study. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2019;61:e253–e259. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000001589.
    1. Martinsson C., Lohela-Karlsson M., Kwak L., Bergström G., Hellman T. What incentives influence employers to engage in workplace health interventions? BMC Public Health. 2016;16:854. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3534-7.
    1. Panagiotakopoulos A. Barriers to employee training and learning in small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) Dev. Learn. Org. Int. J. 2011;25:15–18. doi: 10.1108/14777281111125354.
    1. Rhodes C. Business Statistics. Briefing Paper: Number 06152. House of Commons Library; London, UK: 2018. [(accessed on 30 December 2018)]. Available online: .
    1. Blake H. How to Manage Employee Wellbeing in A Small Business. [(accessed on 12 December 2019)];Financ. Dige. 2019 Available online: .
    1. UNISON . Working With HIV: A Guide for UNISON Safety Reps. UNISON; London, UK: 2013. [(accessed on 12 December 2019)]. Available online: .
    1. National Aids Trust (NAT) HIV@ Work—Advice for Employers. [(accessed on 12 December 2019)];2012 Jun; Available online: .
    1. Liu C., Shao S., Liu C., Bennett G.G., Prvu Bettger J., Yan L.L. Academia-industry digital health collaborations: A cross-cultural analysis of barriers and facilitators. Digit. Health. 2019;5:2055207619878627. doi: 10.1177/2055207619878627.
    1. Hekler E., Klasnja P., Riley W., Buman M.P., Huberty J.L. Agile science: Creating useful products for behavior change in the real-world. Transl. Behav. Med. 2016;6:317–328. doi: 10.1007/s13142-016-0395-7.
    1. Todhunter F. The usefulness of an Agile methodology to underpin a public engagement activity. SJNP. 2017;1:13–108.
    1. Blake H., Gartshore E. Workplace wellness using online learning tools in a healthcare setting. Nurse Educ. Pract. 2016;20:70–75. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2016.07.001.
    1. Sucala M., Ezeanochie N.M., Cole-Lewis H., Turgiss J. An iterative, interdisciplinary, collaborative framework for developing and evaluating digital behavior change interventions. Transl. Behav. Med. 2019 doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibz109.
    1. Linnan L., Steckler A. Process Evaluation for Public Health Interventions and Research: An Overview. Jossey-Bass; San Francisco, CA, USA: 2002.
    1. Murray E., Hekler E.B., Andersson G., Collins L.M., Doherty A., Hollis C., Rivera D.E., West R., Wyatt J.C. Evaluating Digital Health Interventions: Key Questions and Approaches. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2016;51:843–851. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.06.008.
    1. Agile Alliance, Manifesto for Agile Software Development. [(accessed on 12 December 2019)];2001 Available online:
    1. Hoffmann T.C., Glasziou P.P., Boutron I., Milne R., Perera R., Moher D., Altman D.G., Barbour V., Macdonald H., Johnston M., et al. Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ. 2014;348:g1687. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g1687.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever