Development and Fidelity Testing of the Test@Work Digital Toolkit for Employers on Workplace Health Checks and Opt-In HIV Testing
Development and Fidelity Testing of the Test@Work Digital Toolkit for Employers on Workplace Health Checks and Opt-In HIV Testing
复制标题
DOI：
10.3390/ijerph17010379
复制
发表时间：
2020-01-01
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Evans, Catrin
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Blake, Holly;Somerset, Sarah;Evans, Catrin
背景：在英国，很少有雇主为员工提供一般的健康检查，而且很少包括选择参加艾滋病毒检测。有必要就工作场所的健康检查和艾滋病毒检测向雇主提供基于证据的指导和支持。采用敏捷方法开发和评估了一个数字工具包，以促进雇主对工作场所健康检查的了解。方法：Test@Work工具包开发包括在线调查（第1阶段：n = 201），利益相关者咨询（第2阶段：n = 19），专家同行评审（第3阶段：n = 24）和试点测试（第4阶段：n = 20）。该工具包包括关于工作场所健康促进、工作场所健康检查和保密的艾滋病毒选择检测的雇主指导，并附有资源指示。试点测试包括对保真度（交付和参与）和实施质量（态度、资源、实用性、可接受性、可用性和成本）的评估。结果：第一阶段：绝大多数受访者会考虑在工作场所提供一般健康检查，包括保密的可选艾滋病毒检测，这一观点在不同组织类型之间具有广泛可比性（n = 201；公共：87.8%；私人：89.7%；第三：87.1%）。第二和第三阶段：利益攸关方强调了重要的内容考虑：(1)纳入工作场所健康倡议的商业案例，(2)明确雇主责任的途径，以及(3)将艾滋病毒相关信息与其他健康领域一起呈现。在表示方面，涉众建议该工具包应该简洁，具有清晰的路标，并托管在可信门户上。第四阶段：雇主对工具包的内容、可用性和实用性感到满意。该工具包在交付和雇主参与方面具有很高的保真度。对实施质量的评估显示了高可用性和实用性，具有较低的完成负担和可接受的成本影响。报告的资源挑战很少，并且该工具包被认为适用于任何类型的组织，无论其规模或资源如何。结论：雇主认为Test@Work工具包是有用的，有意义的，适合他们的需求。这一数字资源可用于支持雇主在促进工作场所健康的背景下参与健康筛查和选择艾滋病毒检测。
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.