首页> 外文期刊>American journal of health promotion: AJHP >Effectiveness and cost of two stair-climbing interventions-less is more.
【24h】

Effectiveness and cost of two stair-climbing interventions-less is more.

机译:两种爬楼梯干预措施的有效性和成本要少得多。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

PURPOSE: The current study compared two interventions for promotion of stair climbing in the workplace, an information-based intervention at a health information day and an environmental intervention (point-of-choice prompts), for their effectiveness in changing stair climbing and cost per employee. DESIGN: Interrupted time-series design. SETTING: Four buildings on a university campus. SUBJECTS: Employees at a university in the United Kingdom. INTERVENTIONS: Two stair-climbing interventions were compared: (1) a stand providing information on stair climbing at a health information day and (2) point-of-choice prompts (posters). MEASURES: Observers recorded employees' gender and method of ascent (n = 4279). The cost of the two interventions was calculated. ANALYSIS: Logistic regression. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between baseline (47.9% stair climbing) and the Workplace Wellbeing Day (48.8% stair climbing), whereas the prompts increased stair climbing (52.6% stair climbing). The health information day and point-of-choice prompts cost Dollars 773.96 and Dollars 31.38, respectively. CONCLUSION: The stand at the health information day was more expensive than the point-of-choice prompts and was inferior in promoting stair climbing. It is likely that the stand was unable to encourage stair climbing because only 3.2% of targeted employees visited the stand. In contrast, the point-of-choice prompts were potentially visible to all employees using the buildings and hence better for disseminating the stair climbing message to the target audience.
机译:目的:本研究比较了两种促进工作场所爬楼梯的干预措施,一种在健康信息日的基于信息的干预措施和一项环境干预措施(选择要点提示),它们在改变楼梯爬梯和降低人均成本方面的有效性。雇员。设计:中断时间序列设计。地点:大学校园中的四座建筑物。主题:英国一所大学的员工。干预措施:比较了两种爬楼梯干预措施:(1)在健康信息日提供有关爬楼梯信息的展台,以及(2)选择地点提示(海报)。措施:观察者记录了员工的性别和上升方式(n = 4279)。计算了两种干预措施的费用。分析:逻辑回归。结果:基线(47.9%爬楼梯)与工作场所健康日(48.8%爬楼梯)之间没有显着差异,而提示增加了爬楼梯(52.6%爬楼梯)的提示。健康信息日和选择点提示的费用分别为773.96美元和31.38美元。结论:在健康信息日的展位比选择地点提示要贵,并且在促进爬楼梯方面不如。展台很可能无法鼓励爬楼梯,因为只有3.2%的目标员工来了展台。相比之下,使用建筑物的所有员工都有可能看到选择点提示,因此更好地将爬楼梯信息传播给了目标受众。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号