FairShare evidence summary
Effect of a Workplace Wellness Program on Employee Health and Economic Outcomes: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Original source published:
The bottom line
The most rigorous test of a modern workplace wellness program found employees reported healthier behaviors but showed no significant improvement in any clinical or economic outcome after 18 months across 160 worksites. For leaders, this is strong evidence that generic wellness offerings should not be expected to move burnout, absenteeism, or cost. The retail setting and single program design leave room for differently designed clinical-sector programs to perform better.
What the source found
Largest-scale randomized controlled trial of a modern workplace wellness program (8-module: nutrition, physical activity, stress reduction) across 160 worksites at a U.S. retail company; 20 treatment vs 140 control worksites over 18 months; employees reported healthier behaviors but no statistically significant difference on any clinical or economic outcome — blood pressure, cholesterol, absenteeism, job performance, or healthcare spending.
Limitations and applicability
Retail worker population, not healthcare; 18-month follow-up may miss longer-term effects; only one company and wellness program design studied.
Population and setting
U.S. retail company employees (>33,000 across 160 worksites)
Used in FairShare guides
About this evidence
Research question / practical issue
How does this source inform Evidence-Based Wellness for the population it studied?
Study design, evidence tier, and source class
Peer Reviewed Rct · primary source · evidence tier 1
Source type: Peer Reviewed Rct · primary · Evidence tier 1
Topics: Evidence-Based Wellness
Audience: Wellness Leaders, Department Leaders