Working with alcohol prevention in occupational health services: "knowing how" is more important than "knowing that" - the WIRUS OHS study.

Mikkel Magnus Thørrisen, Talieh Sadeghi, Tore Bonsaksen, Ian D Graham, Randi Wågø Aas
Author Information
  1. Mikkel Magnus Thørrisen: Department of Rehabilitation Science and Health Technology, Faculty of Health Sciences, OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway. mikkel-magnus.thorrisen@oslomet.no. ORCID
  2. Talieh Sadeghi: Work Research Institute, Centre for Welfare and Labour Research, OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.
  3. Tore Bonsaksen: Department of Health and Nursing Sciences, Faculty of Social and Health Sciences, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Elverum, Norway.
  4. Ian D Graham: Centre for Practice-Changing Research, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.
  5. Randi Wågø Aas: Department of Rehabilitation Science and Health Technology, Faculty of Health Sciences, OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway. randi.aas@uis.no.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Alcohol consumption is a major public health challenge; the majority of employees consume alcohol regularly and a considerable proportion of employees can be characterized as risky drinkers in need of interventions. Occupational health services (OHS) are uniquely positioned for implementing alcohol prevention interventions targeting employees, but rarely do so. Studies have shown that lack of knowledge among OHS personnel is a barrier to alcohol prevention activity. This study aimed to explore OHS personnels' levels of theoretical and practical alcohol knowledge, and whether these two ways of knowing were differentially associated with alcohol prevention activity.
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, survey data were collected from 322 OHS personnel in Norway in 2018 (response rate = 53.6%). The survey included variables of two ways of knowing (theoretical and practical) and three types of doing (intervention frequency, conducting individual interventions, and conducting group interventions). Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics, paired sample t-tests, bivariate correlations, and adjusted linear and logistic regression analyses.
RESULTS: OHS personnel rated their theoretical alcohol knowledge higher than their practical knowledge (η = 0.33, p < 0.001). Higher reported levels of practical knowledge were associated with higher intervention frequency (b = 0.39, β = 0.60, p < 0.001) and greater likelihood of conducting individual interventions (OR = 1.60, p < .001) as well as group interventions (OR = 1.84, p < 0.001). Theoretical knowledge was not associated with conducting interventions, and there was no evidence of an interaction between the two ways of knowing in their association with doing. Sensitivity analyses did not indicate clustering effects of OHS personnel being employed within different units.
CONCLUSIONS: Different ways of knowing about alcohol among OHS personnel were dissimilarly associated with conducting alcohol prevention interventions in occupational health settings. For doing, knowing how seems to be more important than knowing that. Training programs for OHS personnel should emphasize knowledge about how to deal with alcohol-related issues and how to conduct prevention interventions, rather than focus on detrimental effects of alcohol.

Keywords

References

  1. Aust N Z J Public Health. 1998;22(3 Suppl):324-31 [PMID: 9629817]
  2. PLoS One. 2019 May 13;14(5):e0216199 [PMID: 31083659]
  3. JAMA. 2006 Sep 6;296(9):1094-102 [PMID: 16954489]
  4. Lancet. 2018 Apr 14;391(10129):1513-1523 [PMID: 29676281]
  5. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2018 May;22(3):507-515 [PMID: 29551660]
  6. CMAJ. 2009 Aug 4;181(3-4):165-8 [PMID: 19620273]
  7. N Engl J Med. 2003 Jun 26;348(26):2635-45 [PMID: 12826639]
  8. Br J Cancer. 2015 Feb 3;112(3):580-93 [PMID: 25422909]
  9. J Gen Psychol. 2009 Jul;136(3):231-41 [PMID: 19650519]
  10. BMC Public Health. 2018 Jun 14;18(1):735 [PMID: 29898703]
  11. Am J Epidemiol. 2014 Mar 15;179(6):692-9 [PMID: 24477748]
  12. Work. 2016;55(4):849-859 [PMID: 28059808]
  13. Addict Behav Rep. 2021 Dec;14:100377 [PMID: 34549078]
  14. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2011 Jan;72(1):34-43 [PMID: 21138709]
  15. BMJ Open. 2019 Jul 16;9(7):e029184 [PMID: 31315869]
  16. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Aug 6;22(1):1004 [PMID: 35933345]
  17. Psychol Med. 2017 Apr;47(5):949-957 [PMID: 27928972]
  18. Addiction. 2017 Jun;112(6):968-1001 [PMID: 28220587]
  19. Occup Environ Med. 2007 Sep;64(9):602-8 [PMID: 17525095]
  20. Clin Med Insights Reprod Health. 2019 Mar 27;13:1179558119838872 [PMID: 30944523]
  21. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2016 Mar;35(2):158-69 [PMID: 26331574]
  22. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2000 Feb;24(2):180-7 [PMID: 10698370]
  23. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Mar 24;19(7): [PMID: 35409563]
  24. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2012 Dec;9(4):193-4 [PMID: 23122170]
  25. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2011 May;35(5):976-83 [PMID: 21314695]
  26. Alcohol Alcohol. 2022 Jan 8;57(1):47-57 [PMID: 33604615]
  27. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2019 Jun 26;14(1):30 [PMID: 31242911]
  28. Addiction. 2009 Mar;104(3):365-77 [PMID: 19207344]
  29. Workplace Health Saf. 2019 Nov;67(11):537-542 [PMID: 31540564]
  30. PLoS One. 2017 Oct 17;12(10):e0186503 [PMID: 29040323]
  31. Alcohol Alcohol. 2013 Nov-Dec;48(6):694-9 [PMID: 23842842]
  32. Med Care. 2001 Aug;39(8 Suppl 2):II46-54 [PMID: 11583121]
  33. Lancet. 2005 Feb 5-11;365(9458):519-30 [PMID: 15705462]
  34. Int J Occup Environ Health. 1998 Apr-Jun;4(2):71-8 [PMID: 10026467]
  35. J Addict Dis. 2020 Apr-Jun;38(2):100-112 [PMID: 32037988]
  36. Occup Med (Lond). 2020 Jul 17;70(5):359-363 [PMID: 32406513]
  37. Med Pr. 2022 Feb 18;73(1):19-24 [PMID: 35068486]
  38. Lancet. 2018 Sep 22;392(10152):1015-1035 [PMID: 30146330]
  39. Lancet. 2016 Jun 25;387(10038):2582-2583 [PMID: 27353807]
  40. PLoS One. 2015 Mar 23;10(3):e0121174 [PMID: 25798596]
  41. Addiction. 2011 May;106(5):906-14 [PMID: 21382111]
  42. Front Psychiatry. 2014 Oct 06;5:131 [PMID: 25339914]
  43. PLoS One. 2022 Jan 11;17(1):e0262458 [PMID: 35015789]
  44. BMC Public Health. 2017 Oct 5;17(1):787 [PMID: 28982348]
  45. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2013 Dec 15;133(3):825-31 [PMID: 24156883]
  46. Alcohol Alcohol. 2019 May 1;54(3):264-271 [PMID: 30957142]
  47. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2008;21(2):179-87 [PMID: 18715842]
  48. J Trauma. 2011 Jun;70(6):1437-43 [PMID: 21817982]
  49. J Occup Health. 2020 Jan;62(1):e12172 [PMID: 33058404]
  50. Alcohol Alcohol. 2014 Sep-Oct;49(5):531-9 [PMID: 25031247]
  51. J Stud Alcohol. 2000 Mar;61(2):203-19 [PMID: 10757130]
  52. Alcohol Alcohol. 2011 Jul-Aug;46(4):441-50 [PMID: 21596761]
  53. Isr J Psychiatry. 2018;55(2):32-36 [PMID: 30351278]

MeSH Term

Alcohol-Related Disorders
Alcoholism
Cross-Sectional Studies
Humans
Occupational Health
Occupational Health Services

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0alcoholinterventionsOHSknowledgepreventionpersonnelknowinghealthconductingpracticalwaysassociated001employeesstudytheoreticaltwop < 0AlcoholconsumptionOccupationalservicesamongactivitylevelssurveyinterventionfrequencyindividualgroupanalyseshigher60OR = 1effectsoccupationalimportant"knowingBACKGROUND:majorpublicchallengemajorityconsumeregularlyconsiderableproportioncancharacterizedriskydrinkersneeduniquelypositionedimplementingtargetingrarelyStudiesshownlackbarrieraimedexplorepersonnels'whetherdifferentiallyMETHODS:cross-sectionaldatacollected322Norway2018responserate = 536%includedvariablesthreetypesDataanalyzeddescriptivestatisticspairedsamplet-testsbivariatecorrelationsadjustedlinearlogisticregressionRESULTS:ratedη = 033Higherreportedb = 039β = 0greaterlikelihoodp <well84TheoreticalevidenceinteractionassociationSensitivityindicateclusteringemployedwithindifferentunitsCONCLUSIONS:DifferentdissimilarlysettingsseemsTrainingprogramsemphasizedealalcohol-relatedissuesconductratherfocusdetrimentalWorkingservices:how"that"-WIRUSKnowledgetranslationPreventionWorkforceWorkplace

Similar Articles

Cited By