Workplace Health Protection and Promotion

Traditionally, health protection and health promotion activities have operated independently of each other in the workplace. Health protection has usually been viewed as encompassing the activities that protect workers from occupational injury and illness ranging from basic safety training to the use of protective gear, work organization, and safety-enhancing modifications. Health promotion, by contrast, has usually been viewed as encompassing the activities that maintain or improve the personal health of a workforce—ranging from health risk assessments to wellness initiatives and immunizations. By placing boundaries around these activities (creating workplace “silos”), their overall effectiveness has been limited. A new concept, “Workplace Health Protection and Promotion, ” seeks to address this limitation by systematically integrating these two previously independent functions. Today's best evidence indicates that the aims of both health protection and health promotion interventions are best achieved when they are working in concert. Workplace health protection and promotion enhances the overall well-being of a workforce by more closely integrating health promotion and health protection activities along a continuum. In this model, health promotion interventions contribute dynamically to improved personal safety in addition to enhancing personal health, while occupational safety interventions contribute dynamically to improved personal health in addition to enhancing personal safety. The two factors, personal health and personal safety—each essential to a productive worker and to a productive workplace–are effectively combined in a symbiotic manner that increases their impact on overall health and productivity. The whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts. Once health protection and promotion programs are intertwined and deployed strategically to enhance each other, a healthier workforce thus becomes a safer workforce and vice versa. Organizations, whether large or small, can engage in this new strategy by systematically integrating their health promotion safety and environmental programs, policies, and processes. Activities incorporated in workplace health protection and promotion are diverse and reflect a wide range of functions and goals. Examples include assessing worker health status, addressing personal health risks, the early recognition and treatment of injury or illness, job safety initiatives and efforts to create cultures of health and safety, disability prevention and return-to-work programs, emergency preparedness planning, and behavioral health and environmental safety initiatives. While these may appear to be diverse approaches, they are all aimed at the same thing: promoting overall health and preventing workplace injuries and illnesses. Stated simply, workplace health protection and promotion is the strategic and systematic integration of distinct environmental, health, and safety policies and programs into a continuum of activities that enhances the overall health and well-being of the workforce and prevents work-related injuries and illnesses. ABOUT THIS DISCUSSION ARTICLE This discussion article makes the case for a new way of approaching health protection and health promotion, advancing the premise that a healthier workforce will be a safer workforce and a safer workforce is a healthier workforce. This article discusses the current state of workplace health, safety, and environmental programs; reviews the literature on the impact of these programs; and discusses how the integration of health protection and promotion activities can improve safety and decrease workplace injuries and illness. PROBLEM Currently, most workplace health protection programs (ie, safety and work environment) are separated from workplace health promotion (WHP) programs (ie, wellness and disease management). The two are often housed in completely distinct organizational divisions with health protection often residing in non-health oriented units and health promotion initiatives a function of human resources or benefits. These programs are usually run as distinct, separate activities, with minimal attempts at integration. This lack of integration prevents optimal resource utilization and impedes efforts to maximize the overall health and productivity of the workforce. HYPOTHESIS Integrating traditionally independent health protection and health promotion activities will create synergy and enhance the overall health and well-being of the workforce while decreasing the likelihood of workplace injuries and illnesses. WHAT IS DRIVING THE NEED TO INTEGRATE HEALTH PROTECTION AND HEALTH PROMOTION? The American health care system faces enormous challenges and is on a collision course with several trends that have dire consequences for the nation: Chronic health conditions are on the rise across all age groups in the United States, and it is expected that in the near future, conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, and cancer will add an enormous burden to already high costs of health care. Employers will be particularly impacted as they provide medical benefits for employees and absorb the costs of absenteeism and of long- and short-term disability claims. 1 Nearly 50% of Americans have one chronic health condition, and of this group, nearly half have multiple chronic conditions. 2 One study found that more than 80% of medical spending goes toward care for chronic conditions. 2 Health risks leading to chronic conditions are also on the rise. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in 2007, only one state (Colorado) had a prevalence of obesity less than 20%. Thirty states had a prevalence equal to or greater than 25%. 3 A 2001 study found that annual medical claims' costs for people with five or more health risks were double the costs of individuals who were healthier, that is, had two or fewer health risks. 4 The American workforce is aging, and it is projected that between 2006 and 2016, the number of workers 55 to 64 years of age will increase by 36. 5%, while workers between 65 and 74 years of age and older than 75 years will increase by 80%. 5 By 2015, one in every five workers will be 55 years of age or older. 6 Older workers typically suffer from chronic health conditions and have multiple health risks. The chronic conditions most common among older age groups often require more care, are more disabling, and are more difficult and costly to treat than the chronic conditions that are more common in younger age groups. 7 In addition to these trends, the percentage of women in the workforce is increasing, and today, women comprise 46. 8% of the workforce. 8 The distribution of nonfatal occupational injuries by sex varies by occupational sector. “In 2007, females accounted for 68. 4 percent of injuries occurring in management, professional, and related occupations, while making up 51. 2 percent of the workforce in that sector. Similarly, females represented 56. 4 percent of the service workforce, but accounted for 61. 1 percent of injuries in that sector. ”9 As the nation grapples with these trends, employers more and more have begun to understand that as the health risks of the US population increase, the disease burden on the workforce moves in parallel, and they recognize that this formula does not bode well for the economic health of their companies. Research has shown that common chronic conditions, such as cancer, heart disease, and diabetes, are driving up total health-related costs in the workplace. 10–12 Other health conditions among workers—ranging from musculoskeletal/pain and depression to obesity—are adding to those costs. 13, 14 In addition to a steadily rising medical and pharmaceutical cost burden, employers are now also seeing evidence of significant productivity–cost impacts related to poor health. Research is beginning to show a much greater connection between employee health and productivity in the workplace than was ever realized in the past. For example, studies have shown that on average for every one dollar spent on worker medical/pharmacy costs, employers absorb two to three dollars of health-related productivity costs. 15 These costs are manifested largely in the form of presenteeism (a condition in which employees are on the job but not fully productive), absence, and disability. Compounding these issues for employers is the impact of safety issues and health-related environmental-hazard costs. Statistics show that work-related accidents and injuries exert an enormous toll on employers. Accidents, overexertion, or injuries caused by excessive lifting, carrying, or pushing, adds significantly to employer costs–with an annual impact in the billions of dollars. The National Safety Council (NSC) has estimated that on-the-job injuries cost the United States more than 130 billion annually. 16 Included in this figure are wage and productivity losses of 68 billion, medical costs of 24 billion, and administrative costs of 22 billion. In addition to these safety- and hazard-related injury costs, the effort of administering to the needs of injured workers is also extremely costly. 17 The NSC estimates that employers spend well more than 10 billion in time lost for employees who were not injured but involved in the reporting and investigation of injuries. 16 The cost of protecting employees from environmental hazards in the workplace is also substantial. While the overall cost of environmental regulation in the United States has been estimated to be roughly 2% of the gross domestic product, for some industries, it is particularly high. 18 The costs associated with benzene protection in coal factories or for arsenic protection in glass-manufacturing plants—both of which run in the millions of dollars per life-year–are common examples of potential economic burdens as employers address environmental safety issues. When all of these factors are added together, they spell out a difficult reality for the United States: the national pipeline of healthy, productive workers faces significant health-related challenges. Moreover, the cost of responding to these workplace health and safety issues has the potential to undermine America's competitiveness in the global marketplace. More than ever before, the nation needs to take steps to ensure the optimal health of its workforce. DEFINING THE NEW “WORKPLACE” Amidst all of these megatrends, the very nature and definition of the workplace are changing. The stationary-manufacturing and product-oriented workplaces of the past centuries have morphed into much-wider, all-encompassing virtual work environments that span workplace, home, and community, as technology enables workers to stay connected 24/7/365. This new environment makes it possible to work anyplace, anytime. As employers fulfill the need to supply customers in a more efficient and timely manner, around-the-clock work activity has increased, making not only where employees are working but also when they work important elements in the new-age workforce. As companies have downsized and right sized to meet the new economy, increasing numbers of contingent workers are used as staff in workplaces. These individuals may have numerous employers who make up their annual income and, in many cases, may not have access to health benefits. Twenty percent of wage-and-salary employees now work a shift other than a regular daytime shift, and many are working extended hours or more than one job. 19 DEFINING THE NEW “WORKFORCE” As noted, the workforce is aging. In addition, women are entering the workforce in greater numbers. 8 In 1950, only one in every three women or 33. 9% of all women (16 years of age or older) were in the labor force. By 2010, 59. 2% of the 122 million women aged 16 years and older participated in the labor force, either working or looking for work. In 2010, women comprised 46. 8% of the total workforce, up from 45% in 1998. Unemployment among women is lower than for men. In 2009, only 8. 1% of women were unemployed compared with 10. 3% of men. 8 The growing presence of women in the workforce is significant in that women traditionally make the health care decisions for the family. Now that they are actively involved in the workplace in increasing numbers, this presents an opportunity for the implementation of safety and health programs with the potential for a broad-ranging impact on the family. Likewise people are working longer, resulting in an older workforce. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), between 1970 and 2007, there was a 101% increase in workers age, that is, 65 years of age and older. 20 During the same time span, total employment increased only 59%. For men older than 65 years, the increase was 75%, but for women, the increase was 147%. The BLS projects that between 2006 and 2016, the number of workers aged 55 to 64 years will increase by 36. 5%, while the number of workers between 65 and 74 years and older than 75 years will increase by 80%. 20 As previously mentioned, older workers suffer from more health risks and/or chronic medical conditions that are usually more costly to treat. A 2003 Towers Perrin report indicated that the annual aggregate medical claims' costs for employees and their dependents between the ages of 25 and 29 years was 2148. 21 This figure rose to 4130 for those between the ages of 40 and 44 years and to 7622 for employees between the ages of 60 and 64 years. As the workforce ages, the medical and pharmacy costs of employers are projected to rise. THE PROFOUND IMPACT OF HEALTH IN THE WORKPLACE In this new environment, where the pressure on both workers and employers is intense and where health costs are skyrocketing and chronic disease and safety and environmental hazards pose new threats, health promotion and health protection measures aimed at the nation's workforce could have significant long-term impact, potentially saving billions in costs. A growing body of research demonstrates the connection between improved health and functional status, worker productivity, and lowered total costs. A 2007 study on health and productivity management programs, funded by the Association of State and Territorial Chronic Disease Program Directors, National Association of Chronic Disease, concluded that well-designed health programs in the workplace could achieve long-term health and productivity improvements in worksite populations. 22 A 2005 study demonstrated that individuals who reduced their health risks generally saw an improvement in productivity, whereas those who increased their health risks or remained the same showed decreased productivity. 23 A Harvard analysis of the literature on costs and savings associated with prevention programs in the workplace found that medical costs were reduced by 3. 27 and absenteeism costs were reduced by 2. 73 for every 1. 00 spent on comprehensive workplace wellness and prevention programs. 24 Another study found that lowering obesity rates alone could lead to productivity gains of 254 billion and avoidance of 60 billion in treatment expenditures. 25 A recent study determined that employers could achieve significant savings by reducing the prevalence of obesity, particularly among those with a body mass index greater than 35. 26 A variety of return-on-investment studies have shown that for every dollar invested in health promotion over a 3-year period, return-on-investment for employers ranges from 1. 40 to 4. 70. 27 WHY WORKPLACE HEALTH IS ESSENTIAL TO HEALTH REFORM These trends and statistics suggest that health is not only of great value to individuals and populations but also to business and industry. Enlightened employers—whether small, medium, or large—are beginning to look beyond health care benefits as a cost to be managed and instead are considering the benefits of good health as an investment to be leveraged. This creates a scenario in which a proactive extension of a “culture of health and safety” into the American workplace can provide a critical piece in the overall health-system reform puzzle. The workplace offers unique resources and infrastructure for addressing the health problems of the overall US population. With many adult Americans spending much of their active, waking hours connected in some way to the workplace, the sheer volume of individuals who can be reached through workplace health programs is vast. The CDC estimates that 65% of the adult population of the United States can be reached through worksites. Research indicates that worksite health programs represent an ideal opportunity to have an impact on the health behaviors of working adults and their families. 28 There are many other reasons why a new focus on health in the workplace makes sense, including the following: Workplace programs can reach segments of the population who may not have access to health information in other settings. Workplaces concentrate groups of people together who share common purpose and culture. The work environment can be utilized to advocate for and provide access to healthy lifestyles. Communicating with workers is straightforward, due to preestablished and well-organized communication channels. Social and organizational supports are available in the workplace. Organizational hierarchies make possible the introduction of procedures, practices, and norms. The physical environment of the workplace can be used to affect health behaviors (cafeteria/food selection, ergonomic office design, use of stairways and landscaping, etc). Financial and other incentives can be utilized in the workplace to gain participation in programs. 29 Studies show that health promotion activities in the workplace have the capacity to influence both individuals and populations. Public health promotion—which has used social policy and engineering interventions along with health education to decrease dental caries, improve highway safety, and decrease smoking prevalence in the United States—can be very effectively applied in the workplace. As one part of multicomponent initiatives to improve dietary behavior, for example, several interventions have been found to be effective in increasing healthy food choices. These include point-of-sale education and labeling30 and enriching and subsidizing health food choices available through cafeterias and vending machines. 31, 32 Worksite policies banning tobacco use at the workplace have also gathered momentum in recent years and have added to overall efforts to decrease smoking and limit exposure to second-hand smoke. 33 Employee assistance programs aimed at reducing chemical dependence among employees have been shown to result in significant long-term impacts. 34, 35 In short, the workplace can be considered a microcosm of larger society and as such can provide an effective setting for addressing both individual health and the health of populations. Programs in the workplace can reach and engage segments of the population that may not otherwise be exposed to health-improvement efforts. TRADITIONAL SAFETY AND WELLNESS SILOS NOT OPTIMAL FOR WORKPLACE HEALTH The evidence clearly shows that the health of the workforce is inextricably linked to the productivity of the workforce and the health of the nation's economy. It also shows that employers increasingly recognize this link and are interested in improving worker health by expanding workforce health protection and health promotion programs. Employers in recent decades have devoted more resources and attention to the subject. In one study, a majority reported that they have established some form of health promotion effort in the workplace. 36 But are these efforts sufficient to significantly impact workforce health nationally and to introduce a true culture of health and safety in the workplace? While the national recognition and embrace of programs for workplace health protection and health promotion are clearly on the rise, the 2004 National Worksite Health Promotion Survey found that only 6. 9% of surveyed organizations met the criteria for comprehensive health programming for employees. 37 This falls far short of the 75% target that has been outlined in the and are in distinct employers have programs, which address both health promotion and health protection in a systematic In the majority of the and the are not they far The of the the activities that protect workers from occupational injury and illness and a work often housed in an organizational that is completely separated from health and The in a may have connection with the of the wellness housed in human for The of the the activities that maintain or improve the personal health of a be and in the same with the benefits and implementation but be out of with Safety and Health and safety the may the occupational health efforts at health promotion and disease prevention as a on resources that are for occupational health protection may health safety, and environmental efforts as in population health goals. As National for Safety and Health has noted, occupational health has efforts at health promotion and disease prevention in the workplace at best as resources from occupational health protection and at and attention from the occupational health needs of There has been that a focus on health promotion will employers from their to provide workplaces of can be from the health focus of employers. the of the on the number of workplace and has In workers were on the By 2009, that number had to when the workforce in to more than million workers at more than million worksites. the of the of reported workplace injuries and from per workers in to per workers in companies have a of and have improvements to the workplace to ensure a workforce. a the usually and a analysis is the of work. an employee were to have a heart on the work same focus and of that companies over the 40 years in to workplace injury and illness need to be to a of on the overall health of THE FOR WORKPLACE HEALTH PROTECTION AND HEALTH The time has to these employer health promotion and health protection activities to a through integration. in the of wellness and safety are advancing the health improvements to safety safety improvements to health and the by integrating the two create significantly healthier By distinct environmental, health, and safety policies and programs in the workplace into a continuum of activities, it is that employers can enhance the overall health and well-being of the workforce while preventing the work-related injuries and illnesses. In short, a healthier workforce can be a safer a safer workforce can be a healthier workforce. This is an which on its for example, that employees can improve their and through and programs; does that their to injury is that oriented safety programs for example, but they also contribute to overall health gains for is beginning to in these physical condition, of chronic illness, and good health are the factors that have been to be associated with occupational injury It has been clearly for example, that workers with health risk factors are more to injuries than those such risks. these factors are obesity, diabetes, a and/or or by This evidence is one of the driving factors the of more for the presence of numerous medical conditions and in a variety of US of Safety medical for and for medical conditions that impact safety has been effective in lowering accidents among and have found a increased risk for in and have determined that and poor are also associated with injuries at work. found that those who their as were at increased the risk for an at while reported that workers with had a risk for an injury at work. found risks in a reported that poor and increases the risk of occupational injury by reported a between problems of and injuries at studies have found an increased risk for an occupational injury connected to as well as a between poor and the risk for an injury at One study reported a risk for an injury at work in employees with studies increased injury rates in employees reporting at either with or with and a much of injuries in those who had associated with these workplace risks have also been well A of study showed that of costs were to worker health to risk In a study by a of health risk with showed that those with high risk were nearly more to a whereas were more to a short-term disability While there is evidence to that wellness promotion safety, evidence that safety wellness is less need to much more how safety impacts on some current research does suggest an A recent study of worker health programs at for example, shows a between safety and health in an the of a health that both of the health promotion reported gains in both overall health and safety to injuries in compared with injuries in both costs and per employee and the achieved a decrease in the that implementation of comprehensive health protection and promotion activities can lead to a culture of health in the workplace. Other research is increasingly to this studies of the impact of the work environment on the health of workers are that the impact far beyond has been traditionally as occupational health and illness. For example, are more to and suffer from obesity and may be at a risk of research by of the of has that a of factors is related to injuries in the far beyond measures such as the of lifting, and encompassing such factors as and When these factors are together, the potential for overall health gains in