An interventional study of Sun Safe Workplaces Program and Attention Control in Skin Cancer, sponsored by Klein Buendel, Inc.. Completed at 3 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-18.
Sponsored by Klein Buendel, Inc. · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention
A sample of local government organizations are recruited to a group-randomized pretest-posttest controlled trial evaluating the effect of a campaign to promote workplace policy and education on sun protection for outdoor workers. Primary outcome is adoption of formal policies and secondary outcomes are implementation of policy and sun protection practices by outdoor workers.
Workers in the United States spend large amounts of time on the job, making the workplace a key venue for preventive health programs. A workplace risk that has received limited attention is sun protection, despite the fact 8% of the U.S. workforce (over 9 million workers) work outdoors. The investigators have demonstrated that sun safety education can promote sun protection at work. In this revised application, the investigators propose to systematically study a more comprehensive approach to workplace sun safety that goes beyond employee education to promote institutional change. The investigators will implement and evaluate a proactive campaign to change workplace sun protection policies and promote sun safety to managers rather than individual employees. The investigators will assess whether policy adoption alters organizational operations in public employers rather than the private employers examined in our previous research. The specific aims are to: a) create a campaign comprised of personal contacts, printed materials, and Internet tools and resources (i.e., pubic health communication) to promote workplace sun protection policies to managers at public employers, b) evaluate the effectiveness of the campaign at promoting adoption and implementation of workplace sun protection policies, and c) assess whether policy adoption is associated in increases in workers' sun protection practices. An advisory board of public administrators and health experts has been constituted to advise the investigators on campaign and evaluation procedures. Analysis of public employers' existing policies and practices, additional in-depth interviews with public administrators, information design analysis, and usability testing will be conducted to develop an effective campaign. The campaign will be evaluated in a group-randomized, pretest-posttest controlled design. City and county governments in Colorado will serve as the unit of randomization and analysis. Interviews will be conducted with a sample of administrators at these public employers at baseline, interim posttest (n=6 per employer) and final posttest (n=5 per employer). In a subsequent four-year follow-up, surveys with employees and front line supervisors will assess employees' sun protection practices and workplace actions to support employee sun safety; (2) on-site observations of sun protection actions by the employers (e.g., posters, sunscreen, shade structures) will be documented; and (3) costs of implementing the policy campaign and induced employer costs will be tracked. Public employers will be studied because they employ a sizable number of outdoor workers (but results should generalize to for-profit companies). Outcomes will be evaluated at the employer, administrator, and employee levels. At the employer level, adoption of workplace sun protection policies at pretest and each posttest will be assessed with a protocol for coding written workplace policies (primary outcome measure) that demonstrated high reliability in a pilot study. At the administrator level, policy implementation (secondary outcome), theoretical mediators of adoption and implementation, and individual, organizational, political decision making and program variables that might moderate change will be measured in baseline, interim posttest (halfway through the intervention) and final posttest (end of intervention) surveys. At the employee level, analyses will compare the sun protection practices of employees between workplaces that received the intervention and controls and among workplaces that provided education and adopted policy, provided education only, and control workplaces. Analyses will also determine if the extent of sun protection actions by employers influences employees' sun safety practices. At the cost level, the economic evaluation will estimate the return on investment (i.e., comparison of the estimated program benefits to combined cost elements). The proposed study is significant and innovative because it provides critical information applicable to a wide range of industrial sectors with outdoor workers on a workplace risk that has received scant attention. Determining the effectiveness and return on investment of prevention programs is essential for national and local resource investment.
604 studies on the registry are indexed under Skin Neoplasms; 126 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 825 is above the median of 55 across 408 interventional studies indexed under Skin Neoplasms.
Browse Skin Neoplasms studies →Klein Buendel, Inc. is the lead sponsor of 35 studies on the registry; 2 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Program promoting the adoption of occupational sun protection policies by the local government organization comprised of personal visits with senior managers and in-person training of outdoor workers by research staff over two years.
Behavioral: Sun Safe Workplaces Program
Program promoting occupational sun protection practices by employees in local government organizations through two mailings containing educational materials and presentations at state professional meetings by project staff.
Behavioral: Attention Control
The intervention began by sending a Program Announcement Packet and requesting the first face-to-face meeting. At the first meeting, intervention staff covered: 1) Introduction to SSW; 2) Sun Safety Practices in the Workplace; 3) Sun Safety Policy for Outdoor Workers; 4) Sun Safety Policy Adoption; 5) Sun Safety Policy Reinforcement and Maintenance. They presented the SSW Website and a Sun Safety Tool Box. Following the first meeting, the manager scheduled Sun Safety Training by intervention staff with various employee groups. Workplace Sun Safety Materials were sent in four sets (twice a year over two years) for distribution to employees. Research staff made monthly Follow-up Contacts with managers.
Research staff sent printed materials on occupational sun safety to local government organizations twice. These included posters with personal protection messages and skin cancer rates, risk assessment brochures, worksite guides, total skin self-examination CD-Rom, the American Academy of Dermatology SPOT bookmark, and a sun safety tip card from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Staff made presentations on general sun safety topics (not policy) at state professional conferences.
Presence of a Sun Protection Policy for Outdoor Workers Score at 2-Year Follow-up
Project staff coded written workplace policy documents on the presence of 15 "content categories" in three domains: 1) environmental controls; 2) administrative procedures; and 3) personal protection practices. Presence of policy was defined as having one or more policy components present in the written workplace policy documents (value=1) versus no content components present (value=0). Total policy score was calculated by summing the number of policy components in the written documents (range = 0-15). Higher values indicate more comprehensive sun protection policy.
Time frame: 2 year follow-up
Extent of Sun Protection Policy for Outdoor Workers at Posttest
Project staff coded written workplace policy documents on the presence of 15 "content categories" in three domains: 1) environmental controls; 2) administrative procedures; and 3) personal protection practices. Extent of policy was defined as the sum of the content components for each policy content component present in the written workplace policy documents (values=0 to 15). Higher score indicates more extensive policy. Posttest values were compared between conditions, controlling for pretest value.
Time frame: From baseline to 2-year follow-up
| Milestone | Sun Safe Workplaces Program | Attention Control |
|---|---|---|
| Started | 413 | 412 |
| Completed | 266 | 257 |
| Not completed | 147 | 155 |
Project staff coded written workplace policy documents on the presence of 15 "content categories" in three domains: 1) environmental controls; 2) administrative procedures; and 3) personal protection practices. Presence of policy was defined as having one or more policy components present in the written workplace policy documents (value=1) versus no content components present (value=0). Total policy score was calculated by summing the number of policy components in the written documents (range = 0-15). Higher values indicate more comprehensive sun protection policy.
| scores on a scale | Sun Safe Workplaces Program | Attention Control |
|---|---|---|
| Presence of a Sun Protection Policy for Outdoor Workers Score at 2-Year Follow-up | 2.68 ± 0.24 | 0.59 ± 0.11 |
Project staff coded written workplace policy documents on the presence of 15 "content categories" in three domains: 1) environmental controls; 2) administrative procedures; and 3) personal protection practices. Extent of policy was defined as the sum of the content components for each policy content component present in the written workplace policy documents (values=0 to 15). Higher score indicates more extensive policy. Posttest values were compared between conditions, controlling for pretest value.
| scores on a scale | Sun Safe Workplaces Program | Attention Control |
|---|---|---|
| Extent of Sun Protection Policy for Outdoor Workers at Posttest | 4.26 ± 0.38 | 1.35 ± 0.30 |
Collected over Three years. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.
| Group | Deaths | Serious | Other |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sun Safe Workplaces Program | 0/413 (0%) | 0/413 (0%) | 0/413 (0%) |
| Attention Control | 0/412 (0%) | 0/412 (0%) | 0/412 (0%) |
| Age, Continuous(years) | Sun Safe Workplaces Program | Attention Control | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 47.6 ± 10.33 | 47.6 ± 10.33 | 47.6 ± 10.33 |
| Sex/Gender, Customized(Participants) | Sun Safe Workplaces Program | Attention Control | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex — Male | 93 | 93 | 186 |
| Sex — Female | 304 | 304 | 608 |
| Sex — Unknown | 16 | 15 | 31 |
PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.
Plan to share: No
This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.