Checklist of health promotion environments at worksites (CHEW): Development and measurement characteristics

Purpose. Health promotion policy frameworks, recent theorizing, and research all emphasize understanding and mobilizing environmental influences to change particular health-related behaviors in specific settings. The workplace is a key environmental setting. The Checklist of Health Promotion Environments at Worksites (CHEW) was designed as a direct observation instrument to assess characteristics of worksite environments that are known to influence health-related behaviors. Methods. The CHEW is a 112-item checklist of workplace environment features hypothesized to be associated, both positively and negatively, with physical activity, healthy eating, alcohol consumption, and smoking. The three environmental domains assessed are (1) physical characteristics of the worksite, (2) features of the information environment, and (3) characteristics of the immediate neighborhood around the workplace. The conceptual rationale and development studies for the CHEW are described, and data from observational studies of 20 worksites are reported. Results. The data on CHEW-derived environmental attributes showed generally good reliability and identified meaningful sets of variables that plausibly may influence health-related behaviors. With the exception of one information environment attribute, intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.80 to 1.00. Descriptive statistics on selected physical and information environment characteristics indicated that vending machines, showers, bulletin boards, and signs prohibiting smoking were common across worksites. Bicycle racks, visible stairways, and signs related to alcohol consumption, nutrition, and health. promotion were relatively uncommon. Conclusions. These findings illustrate the types of data on environmental attributes that can be derived, their relevance for program planning, and how they can characterize variability across worksites. The CHEW is a promising observational measure that has the potential to assess environmental influences on health behaviors and to evaluate workplace health promotion programs.

Reliability of scores between stroke patients and significant others on the Reintegration to Normal Living (RNL) Index

Purpose: This study measured reliability between stroke patients' and significant others' scores on items on the Reintegration to Normal Living (RNL) Index and whether there were any scoring biases. Method The 11-item RNL Index was administered to 57 pairs of patients and significants six months after stroke rehabilitation. The index was scored using a 10-point visual analogue scale. Patient and significant other demographic information and data on patients' clinical, functional and cognitive status were collected. Reliability was measured using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and percent agreement. Results: Overall poor reliability was found for the RNL Index total score (ICC=.36, 95% CI. 07 to .59) and the daily functioning subscale (ICC=.24, 95% CI -.003 to .46) and moderate reliability was found for the perception of self subscale (ICC=.55, 95 % CI .28 to .73). There was a moderate bias for patients to rate themselves as achieving better reintegration than was indicated by significant others, although no demographic or clinical factors were associated with this bias. Exact match agreement was best for the subjective items and worse for items reflecting mobility around the community and participation in a work activity. Conclusions: Caution is needed when interpreting patient information reported by significant others on the RNL Index. The use of a shorter scale to rate the RNL Index requires investigation.