Display options
Cite
Cedstrand E, Mølsted Alvesson H, Augustsson H, et al. Co-Creating an Occupational Health Intervention within the Construction Industry in Sweden: Stakeholder Perceptions of the Process and Output. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(24)doi: 10.3390/ijerph182412872.
Cedstrand, E., Mølsted Alvesson, H., Augustsson, H., Bodin, T., Bodin, E., Nyberg, A., & Johansson, G. (2021). Co-Creating an Occupational Health Intervention within the Construction Industry in Sweden: Stakeholder Perceptions of the Process and Output. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(24), . https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182412872
Cedstrand, Emma, et al. "Co-Creating an Occupational Health Intervention within the Construction Industry in Sweden: Stakeholder Perceptions of the Process and Output." International journal of environmental research and public health vol. 18,24 (2021). doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182412872
Cedstrand E, Mølsted Alvesson H, Augustsson H, Bodin T, Bodin E, Nyberg A, Johansson G. Co-Creating an Occupational Health Intervention within the Construction Industry in Sweden: Stakeholder Perceptions of the Process and Output. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Dec 07;18(24). doi: 10.3390/ijerph182412872. PMID: 34948487; PMCID: PMC8700815.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Dec 07;18(24). doi: 10.3390/ijerph182412872.

Co-Creating an Occupational Health Intervention within the Construction Industry in Sweden: Stakeholder Perceptions of the Process and Output.

International journal of environmental research and public health

Emma Cedstrand, Helle Mølsted Alvesson, Hanna Augustsson, Theo Bodin, Erika Bodin, Anna Nyberg, Gun Johansson

Affiliations

  1. Unit of Occupational Medicine, Institute for Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden.
  2. Department of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden.
  3. Procome Research Group, Medical Management Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden.
  4. Center of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Stockholm Region, 113 65 Stockholm, Sweden.
  5. Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, 751 22 Uppsala, Sweden.

PMID: 34948487 PMCID: PMC8700815 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182412872

Abstract

One way to prevent work-related stress, is to implement primary occupational health interventions aimed at improving the psychosocial work environment. However, such interventions have shown a limited effect, often due to implementation failure and poor contextual fit. Co-creation, where researchers, together with end-users and other relevant stakeholders, develop the intervention is increasingly encouraged. However, few studies have evaluated the effects of co-created interventions, and participants' experience of the co-creation process. This is one of the first studies evaluating stakeholder perceptions of co-creating an occupational health intervention. We applied a thematic analysis, with data from 12 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders involved in the co-creation. Our results show that the respondents, in general, were satisfied with engaging in the co-creation, and they reported an increased awareness regarding risk factors of stress and how these should be handled. Additionally, the respondents described trust in the intervention activities and a good fit into the context. The study indicates that co-creating occupational health interventions can enhance the implementation and the contextual fit.

Keywords: co-creation; implementation; occupational health intervention; psychosocial work environment; stress

References

  1. Lancet Public Health. 2021 Sep;6(9):e625 - PubMed
  2. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2018 Jan 1;44(1):58-68 - PubMed
  3. BMC Public Health. 2020 Mar 30;20(1):424 - PubMed
  4. Eur J Work Organ Psychol. 2020 Aug 26;30(3):415-427 - PubMed
  5. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Jun 05;15(6): - PubMed
  6. Implement Sci. 2017 Sep 15;12(1):114 - PubMed
  7. Work Stress. 2012 Apr;26(2):91-111 - PubMed
  8. SSM Popul Health. 2017 Dec;3:132-135 - PubMed
  9. J Appl Psychol. 2003 Oct;88(5):879-903 - PubMed
  10. Implement Sci. 2015 Feb 12;10:21 - PubMed
  11. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Oct 06;17(19): - PubMed
  12. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2018 Jan;84:9-16 - PubMed
  13. Am J Health Promot. 2007 Mar-Apr;21(4):248-54 - PubMed
  14. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Mar 29;18(7): - PubMed
  15. Occup Environ Med. 2017 Mar;74(4):301-310 - PubMed
  16. Implement Sci. 2009 Oct 19;4:67 - PubMed
  17. J Occup Health Psychol. 2008 Jan;13(1):69-93 - PubMed
  18. Health Expect. 2020 Apr;23(2):358-367 - PubMed
  19. Res Involv Engagem. 2019 Jan 9;5:2 - PubMed
  20. BMC Public Health. 2017 Jan 31;17(1):141 - PubMed
  21. BMC Med Ethics. 2015 Nov 16;16:78 - PubMed
  22. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349-57 - PubMed
  23. BMJ. 2021 Feb 16;372:n434 - PubMed
  24. J Occup Environ Med. 2015 Feb;57(2):217-25 - PubMed
  25. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 07;(4):CD002892 - PubMed
  26. Lancet Public Health. 2021 Sep;6(9):e648-e660 - PubMed
  27. BMC Public Health. 2014 Feb 08;14:135 - PubMed
  28. Implement Sci. 2011 Apr 23;6:42 - PubMed
  29. Addiction. 2012 Aug;107(8):1431-40 - PubMed
  30. Med Care Res Rev. 2008 Aug;65(4):379-436 - PubMed
  31. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Nov 24;17(23): - PubMed
  32. Milbank Q. 2012 Jun;90(2):311-46 - PubMed
  33. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2021 Oct 1;47(7):489-508 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support