Objective: To clarify the relationship between the implementation of health and productivity management (H&PM) and staff health-related attributes in Japanese hospitals. Method: This study selected 2,000 hospitals from the FY2021 Bed Function Report data and conducted a questionnaire survey from November to December 2023. The questionnaire enquired about the H&PM implementation status, which was the explanatory variable; and health-related attributes, which was the objective variable. The implementation status of the four items and the presence or absence of Excellent H&PM Corporation certification were used to divide the hospitals into three groups: certification, implementation, and non-implementation groups. Logistic regression analysis was conducted with H&PM implementation status and health-related attributes as the variables. Results: Data from 221 hospitals were analyzed. There were 25 hospitals in the certification group, 68 in the implementation group, and 128 in the non-implementation group. Logistic regression used average monthly physician overtime as the outcome, with non-implementation hospitals as the reference. Results showed significant positive associations for the implementation and certification groups. Clear written policies on H&PM promotion and full-time occupational health staff were also significantly associated. However, health issue understanding, plan formulation, and management training were not linked to physician overtime. Other health-related attributes were also unrelated to H&PM implementation status. Conclusion: Hospitals engaging in H&PM may provide an appropriate working environment for physicians.

Objectives: This study examined the effects of an online group program based on acceptance and commitment therapy for young employees on employee well-being. Methods: Using a single-case A-B design, this study implemented a program that spanned three 90-min sessions among 24 employees of a Japanese company, who were up to 3 years after graduation from university or postgraduate studies. The baseline (times 1–5) phase was conducted across 15 days, followed by the intervention, which was conducted over 16 days. The intervention (times 6–10) phase was conducted over 35 days following session 1. Results: Fourteen participants met the inclusion criteria. A hierarchical Bayesian model indicated that the hypotheses were not supported in terms of the primary outcome of well-being and process outcome of psychological inflexibility of 10 employees because the credible interval included 0 (well-being: expected a posteriori estimation [EAP] 0.22; 95% credible interval, -0.31 to 0.81; Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II: EAP -2.20; 95% credible interval, -5.60 to 1.31). Tau-U for well-being varied from -0.56 to 0.84 among the participants. Similarly, for the secondary outcomes of 13 employees, the hypotheses were not supported for work performance, work engagement, and stress reaction (World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire: EAP -0.32; 95% credible interval, -1.22 to 0.57; Utrecht Work Engagement Scale-3: EAP -0.08; 95% credible interval, -0.47 to 0.34; stress reaction: EAP -0.49; 95% credible interval, -3.76 to 2.66). Conclusions: The online group program implemented in this study did not improve employee well-being. Trial registration: The study protocol was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (ID: UMIN000042912).