Lifestyle-focused interventions at the workplace to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease – a systematic review
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this review was to summarize the evidence for an effect of lifestyle-targeted interventions at the workplace on the main biological risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: We performed an extensive systematic literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCT) that met the following inclusion criteria: (i) targeted at workers; (ii) aimed at increasing physical activity and/or improving diet; and (iii) measured body weight, body fat, blood pressure, blood lipids and/or blood glucose. We used a nine-item methodological quality list to determine the quality of each study. A best-evidence system was applied, taking into account study quality and consistency of effects. RESULTS: Our review included 31 RCT, describing a diversity of interventions (eg counseling, group education, or exercise). Of these studies, 18 were of high quality. Strong evidence was found for a positive effect on body fat, one of the strongest predictors of CVD risk. Among populations "at risk", there was strong evidence for a positive effect on body weight. Due to inconsistencies in results between studies, there was no evidence for the effectiveness of interventions on the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We found strong evidence for the effectiveness of workplace lifestyle-based interventions on body fat and, in populations at risk for CVD, body weight. Populations with an elevated risk of CVD seemed to benefit most from lifestyle interventions; supervised exercise interventions appeared the least effective intervention strategy. To gain better insight into the mechanisms that led to the intervention effects, the participants' compliance with the intervention and the lifestyle changes achieved should be reported in future studies.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Worksite dietary and/or physical activity interventions demonstrated improvements in adiposity measures, including pooled reductions in weight of 1.26 kg (95% CI, −4.6, −1.0) and in BMI of 0.5 kg/m2 (95% CI, −0.8, −0.2) in one meta-analysis.
“Such worksite dietary and/or physical activity interventions also demonstrated improvements in adiposity measures,267,268 eg, pooled reductions in weight of 1.26 kg (95% confidence interval [CI], −4.6, −1.0) and in BMI of 0.5 kg/m2 (95% CI, −0.8, −0.2) in 1 meta-analysis.”
From Population Approaches to Improve Diet, Physical Activity, and Smoking Habits: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association (2012) · cites this paper as [268]
Interpretation of worksite dietary interventions may be limited by weaknesses in methodology and reporting, such as self-reported outcome measures, undescribed randomization processes, or nonrandomized interventions.
“Although these worksite interventions appear promising, their interpretation may be limited by weaknesses in methodology and reporting; eg, outcome measures were often self-reported, randomization processes were not described, or interventions were nonrandomized.121,268”
From Population Approaches to Improve Diet, Physical Activity, and Smoking Habits: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association (2012) · cites this paper as [268]
Evidence for effects of worksite dietary and/or physical activity interventions on other clinical risk factors was mixed.
“The evidence for effects on other clinical risk factors was mixed.268”
From Population Approaches to Improve Diet, Physical Activity, and Smoking Habits: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association (2012) · cites this paper as [268]
Combination of labeling or other prompts together with additional environmental changes, such as types and locations of foods and beverages served, positively affected purchasing behaviors at worksites.
“In contrast, the combination of such labeling or other prompts together with additional environmental changes, such as types and locations of foods and beverages served, positively affected purchasing behaviors at worksites.”
From Population Approaches to Improve Diet, Physical Activity, and Smoking Habits: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association (2012) · cites this paper as [268]
Overall, studies suggested that use of worksite cafeteria or vending machine labels or icons alone had little effect on improving diet, consistent with findings for labeling and consumer information approaches in other settings.
“Overall, these studies suggested that use of worksite cafeteria or vending machine labels or icons alone had little effect on improving diet, consistent with findings for labeling and consumer information approaches in other settings (Table 4).”
From Population Approaches to Improve Diet, Physical Activity, and Smoking Habits: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association (2012) · cites this paper as [268]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 85 · Cited by 165
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Ilmarinen JE. Aging workers. Occup Environ Med. 2001;58(8):546-52.
- Lindquist TL, Cooper CL. Using lifestyle and coping to reduce job stress and improve health in 'at risk' office workers. Stress Med. 1999;15:143-52.
- Authors
- Groeneveld, I. F., Proper, K. I., van der Beek, A. J., Hildebrandt, V. H., & van Mechelen, W.
- Affiliations
- Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
- Venue
- Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health
- Published
- 2010-01-12
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 202-215
- ISSN
- 0355-3140 (ISSN-L)
- 1795-990X
- OpenAlex
- W2143623960
- Cited by
- 165
- References
- 85
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 2.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment & Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
- TNO Repository (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Repository hosted by TU Delft Library (TU Delft) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
- Keywords
- workplace interventions, lifestyle intervention, cardiovascular risk, physical activity, diet, fat mass, body weight, blood pressure, serum lipids, blood glucose, cardiovascular risk factors, exercise intervention, group education, counseling
- MeSH terms
- Cardiovascular Diseases, Diet, Health Promotion, Humans, Life Style, Motor Activity, Occupational Diseases, Occupational Health Services, Risk Factors, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
