95 Grip on Health intervention among lower socioeconomic position workers discussed between the first and second coder (RS, EV) to reach consensus on the codes. Next, codes were deductively categorized according to the different process evaluation components, as were described in table 1. An overview of codes can be found in additional file 3. Results Evaluation of the training of occupational health professionals Between July 2019 and October 2020 six sessions of the training were provided to 36 OHPs. See table 2 for the main characteristics of these OHPs. Two of these sessions were provided online due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The training was rated on average 8.2 on a scale from 1-10. Role-playing and the possibility to interact with each other were rated most positive. Suggested improvements for the training related to more practice time for role-playing, and to the relevance of provided information as for some OHPs not all information was new. Table 2. Characteristics of occupational health professionals who participated in the training Characteristics N Employed by Employed by an occupational health service Self-employed 32 4 Profession Absenteeism consultant/employability coach Occupational nurse/employability coach Occupational physician Work ability specialist Occupational labor expert Occupational social worker Return to work coordinator 10 7 6 6 4 2 1 Implementation of the Grip on health intervention In the following section of the results, we will describe implementation (i.e. what is delivered and how?) by reach, dose delivered, fidelity and quality of delivery, taking contextual factors into account that may affect or affected implementation of Grip on Health. Reach Thirteen OHPs delivered the intervention in practice. These professionals were: absenteeism consultants and/or employability coaches (N=3), occupational nurses and/or employability coaches (N=3), work ability specialists (N=2), occupational social workers (N=2), occupational physicians (N=2) and one occupational labor expert (N=1). Twenty-three OHPs did not deliver the intervention in practice. These professionals were: absenteeism consultants and/or employability coaches (N=7), 4
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw