To gain insight into the process of applying two guidance strategies - face-to-face (F2F) or e-guidance strategy (EC) - of a Participatory Ergonomics (PE) intervention and whether differences between these guidance strategies occur, 12 construction companies were randomly assigned to a strategy. The process evaluation contained reach, dose delivered, dose received, precision, competence, satisfaction and behavioural change of individual workers. Data were assessed by logbooks, and questionnaires and interviews at baseline and/or after six months. Reach was low (1%). Dose delivered (F2F: 63%; EC: 44%), received (F2F: 42%; EC: 16%) were not sufficient. The precision and competence were sufficient for both strategies and satisfaction was strongly affected by dose received. For behavioural change, knowledge (F2F) and culture (EC) changed positively within companies. Neither strategy was delivered as intended. Compliance to the intervention was low, especially for EC. Starting with a face-to-face meeting might lead to higher compliance, especially in the EC group. Practitioner Summary: This study showed that compliance to a face-to-face and an e-guidance strategy is low. To improve the compliance, it is advised to start with a face-to-face meeting to see which parts of the intervention are needed and which guidance strategy can be used for these parts.
Trial registration: ISRCTN73075751.
Keywords: PE: Participatory Ergonomics; Process evaluation; construction industry; guidance strategies; participatory ergonomics.