Dataset Information

Intervention impact on depression product appraisal and purchasing behavior by employers: a randomized trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Employers can purchase high quality depression products that provide the type, intensity and duration of depression care management shown to improve work outcomes sufficiently for many employers to achieve a return on investment. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to test an intervention to encourage employers to purchase a high quality depression product for their workforce. METHODS:Twenty nine organizations recruited senior health benefit professional members representing public or private employers who had not yet purchased a depression product for all 100+ workers in their company. The research team used randomization blocked by company size to assign eligible employers to: (1) a presentation encouraging employers to purchase a high quality depression product accompanied by a scientifically-derived return on investment estimate, or (2) a presentation encouraging employers to work with their most subscribed health plan to improve depression treatment quality indicators. Two hundred ninety three employers (82.3% of 356) completed baseline data immediately before learning that 140 employers had been randomized to the evidence-based (EB) depression product presentation and 153 had been randomized to the usual care (UC) depression treatment quality indicator presentation. Analysis of 250 (85.3% of 293) employers who completed web-based interviews at 12 and/or 24 months was conducted to determine presentation impact on depression product appraisal and purchasing behavior. RESULTS:The intervention had no impact on depression product appraisal in 232 subjects (F = 2.36, p = .07) or depression product purchasing (chisquare = 1.82, p = .44) in 250 subjects. Depression product appraisal increased in companies with greater health benefit generosity whose benefit professionals were male. Depression product purchasing behavior increased in small companies compared to large companies, companies who knew a vendor that sold depression products at baseline, companies with greater health benefit risk taking, and companies with less politicalization of health care benefit decision making. CONCLUSIONS:Policy makers need to build innovative bridges to the employer community to convince them to purchase evidence-based benefits, even when benefits offer potential financial savings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT01013220.

SUBMITTER: Rost KM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4263121 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Intervention impact on depression product appraisal and purchasing behavior by employers: a randomized trial.

Rost Kathryn M KM Marshall Donna D Xu Stanley S

BMC health services research 20140924

<h4>Background</h4>Employers can purchase high quality depression products that provide the type, intensity and duration of depression care management shown to improve work outcomes sufficiently for many employers to achieve a return on investment. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to test an intervention to encourage employers to purchase a high quality depression product for their workforce.<h4>Methods</h4>Twenty nine organizations recruited senior health benefit professional ...[more]

PMID: 25248854

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRandomized trials demonstrate that depression care management can improve clinical and work outcomes sufficiently for selected employers to realize a return on investment. Employers can now purchase depression products that provide depression care management, defined as employee screening, education, monitoring, and clinician feedback for all depressed employees. We developed an intervention to encourage employers to purchase a depression product that offers the type, intensity, and duration of care management shown to improve clinical and work outcomes.MethodsIn a randomized controlled trial conducted with 360 employers of 30 regional business coalitions, the research team proposes to compare the impact of a value-based marketing intervention to usual-care marketing on employer purchase of depression products. The study will also identify mediators and organizational-level moderators of intervention impact. Employers randomized to the value-based condition receive a presentation encouraging them to purchase depression products scientifically shown to benefit the employee and the employer. Employers randomized to the usual-care condition receive a presentation encouraging them to monitor and improve quality indicators for outpatient depression treatment. Because previous research demonstrates that the usual-care intervention will have little to no impact on employer purchasing, depression product purchasing rates in the usual-care condition capture vendor efforts to market depression products to employers in both conditions while the value-based intervention is being conducted. Employers in both conditions are also provided free technical assistance to undertake the actions each presentation encourages. The research team will use intent-to-treat models of all available data to evaluate intervention impact on the purchase of depression products using a cumulative incidence analysis of 12- and 24-month data.DiscussionBy addressing the 'value to whom?' question, the study advances knowledge about one of the most pivotal problems in the translation of evidence-based care to 'real world' settings: whether purchasers can be influenced to buy healthcare products on the basis of value and not exclusively on the basis of cost. If value-based marketing increases depression product purchase rates over usual care, this study will provide encouragement to market new healthcare products on the basis of the product's value to the purchaser as well as the recipient of care.Trial registrationClinical trials registration numberNCT01013220.

Project description:BackgroundMost food in the United Kingdom is purchased in supermarkets, and many of these purchases are routinely tracked through supermarket loyalty card data. Using such data may be an effective way to develop remote public health interventions and to measure objectively their effectiveness at changing food purchasing behavior.ObjectiveThe Front-of-pack food Labels: Impact on Consumer Choice (FLICC) study is a pilot randomized controlled trial of a digital behavior change intervention. This pilot trial aimed to collect data on recruitment and retention rates and to provide estimates of effect sizes for the primary outcome (healthiness of ready meals and pizzas purchased) to inform a larger trial.MethodsThe intervention consisted of a website where participants could access tailored feedback on previous purchases of ready meals and pizzas, set goals for behavior change, and model and practice the recommended healthy shopping behavior using traffic light labels. The control consisted of Web-based information on traffic light labeling. Participants were recruited via email from a list of loyalty card holders held by the participating supermarket. All food and drink purchases for the participants for the 6 months before recruitment, during the 6-week intervention period, and during a 12-week washout period were transferred to the research team by the participating supermarket. Healthiness of ready meals and pizzas was measured using a predeveloped scale based solely on the traffic light colors on the foods. Questionnaires were completed at recruitment, end of the intervention, and end of washout to estimate the effect of the intervention on variables that mediate behavior change (eg, belief and intention formation).ResultsWe recruited 496 participants from an initial email to 50,000 people. Only 3 people withdrew from the study, and purchase data were received for all other participants. A total of 208 participants completed all 3 questionnaires. There was no difference in the healthiness of purchased ready meals and pizzas between the intervention and control arms either during the intervention period (P=.32) or at washout (P=.59).ConclusionsAlthough the FLICC study did not find evidence of an impact of the intervention on food purchasing behavior, the unique methods used in this pilot trial are informative for future studies that plan to use supermarket loyalty card data in collaboration with supermarket partners. The experience of the trial showcases the possibilities and challenges associated with the use of loyalty card data in public health research.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN19316955; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN19316955 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76IVZ9WjK).International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.1186/s40814-015-0015-1.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Psychological interventions for the prevention of depression might be a cost-effective way to reduce the burden associated with depressive disorders. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a Web-based guided self-help intervention to prevent major depressive disorder (MDD) in people with subthreshold depression (sD). METHODS:A pragmatic randomized controlled trial was conducted with follow-up at 12 months. Participants were recruited from the general population via a large statutory health insurance company and an open access website. Participants were randomized to a Web-based guided self-help intervention (ie, cognitive-behavioral therapy and problem-solving therapy assisted by supervised graduate students or health care professionals) in addition to usual care or to usual care supplemented with Web-based psycho-education (enhanced usual care). Depression-free years (DFYs) were assessed by blinded diagnostic raters using the telephone-administered Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis Disorders at 6- and 12-month follow-up, covering the period to the previous assessment. Costs were self-assessed through a questionnaire. Costs measured from a societal and health care perspective were related to DFYs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). RESULTS:In total, 406 participants were enrolled in the trial. The mean treatment duration was 5.84 (SD 4.37) weeks. On average, participants completed 4.93 of 6 sessions. Significantly more DFYs were gained in the intervention group (0.82 vs 0.70). Likewise, QALY health gains were in favor of the intervention, but only statistically significant when measured with the more sensitive SF-6D. The incremental per-participant costs were €136 (£116). Taking the health care perspective and assuming a willingness-to-pay of €20,000 (£17,000), the intervention's likelihood of being cost-effective was 99% for gaining a DFY and 64% or 99% for gaining an EQ-5D or a SF-6D QALY. CONCLUSIONS:Our study supports guidelines recommending Web-based treatment for sD and adds that this not only restores health in people with sD, but additionally reduces the risk of developing a MDD. Offering the intervention has an acceptable likelihood of being more cost-effective than enhanced usual care and could therefore reach community members on a wider scale. TRIAL REGISTRATION:German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00004709; http://www.drks.de/DRKS00004709 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6kAZVUxy9).

Project description:BackgroundDietary intake is a powerful modifiable factor that influences cancer risk; however, most US adults do not adhere to dietary guidelines for cancer prevention. One promising pathway for improving dietary adherence is targeting grocery shopping habits. Interventions might facilitate healthy grocery choices, with a combination of mHealth and traditional methods, by promoting the salience of dietary goals while shopping, enhancing motivation to make dietary changes, and increasing household support for healthy food purchasing.ObjectiveThis pilot study will assess feasibility and acceptability of intervention components designed to improve adherence to dietary guidelines for cancer prevention (preliminary aim). The primary aim of the study is to quantify the effect of each intervention component, individually and in combination, on dietary intake (primary aim) and grocery store food purchases (exploratory aim). Mediation analyses will be conducted to understand the mechanisms of action (goal salience, motivation, and household support-secondary aims). The overarching goal is to optimize an mHealth intervention to be tested in a future fully powered clinical trial.MethodsThe study enrolled adults (N=62) with low adherence to dietary recommendations for cancer prevention. In a 20-week program, all participants attend a nutrition education workshop and receive weekly educational messages through an app. A factorial design is used to test 4 intervention components: (1) location-triggered messages: educational messages are delivered when arriving at grocery stores; (2) reflections on the benefits of change: content is added to messages to encourage reflection on anticipated benefits of healthy eating, and participants attend an additional workshop session and 3 coach calls on this topic; (3) coach monitoring: food purchases are monitored digitally by a coach who sends personalized weekly app messages and conducts 3 coaching calls that focus on feedback about purchases; and (4) household support: another adult in the household receives messages designed to elicit support for healthy food purchasing, and support is addressed in 3 coach calls and an extra workshop session attended by the index participant and household member. Assessments are completed at weeks 0, 10, and 20 using self-report measures, as well as objective capture of grocery data from the point of purchase using store loyalty accounts.ResultsThe National Cancer Institute funded this study (R21CA252933) on July 7, 2020. Participant recruitment began in the spring of 2021 and concluded with the successful enrollment of 62 participants. Data collection is expected to be completed in the summer of 2022, and results are expected to be disseminated in the summer of 2023.ConclusionsThe results of this study will inform the development of scalable interventions to lower cancer risk via changes in dietary intake.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04947150; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04947150.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/39669.

Project description:BackgroundWeb-based interventions have been shown to be effective for the treatment of depression. However, interventions are often complex and include a variety of elements, making it difficult to identify the most effective component(s).ObjectiveThe aim of this pilot study was to shed light on mechanisms in the online treatment of depression by comparing a single-module, fully automated intervention for depression (internet-based behavioral activation [iBA]) to a nonoverlapping active control intervention and a nonactive control group.MethodsWe assessed 104 people with at least mild depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, >4) via the internet at baseline (t0) and 2 weeks (t1) and 4 weeks (t2) later. After the t0 assessment, participants were randomly allocated to one of three groups: (1) iBA (n=37), (2) active control using a brief internet-based mindfulness intervention (iMBI, n=32), or (3) care as usual (CAU, n=35). The primary outcome was improvement in depressive symptoms, as measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. Secondary parameters included changes in activity, dysfunctional attitudes, and quality of life.ResultsWhile groups did not differ regarding the change in depression from t0 to t1 (ηp2=.007, P=.746) or t0 to t2 (ηp2=.008, P=.735), iBA was associated with a larger decrease in dysfunctional attitudes from t0 to t2 in comparison to CAU (ηp2=.053, P=.04) and a larger increase in activity from t0 to t1 than the pooled control groups (ηp2=.060, P=.02). A change in depression from t0 to t2 was mediated by a change in activity from t0 to t1. At t1, 22% (6/27) of the participants in the iBA group and 12% (3/25) of the participants in the iMBI group indicated that they did not use the intervention.ConclusionsAlthough we did not find support for the short-term efficacy of the single-module iBA regarding depression, long-term effects are still conceivable, potentially initiated by changes in secondary outcomes. Future studies should use a longer intervention and follow-up interval.Trial registrationDKRS (#DRKS00011562).

Dataset Information

Intervention impact on depression product appraisal and purchasing behavior by employers: a randomized trial.

Publications

Intervention impact on depression product appraisal and purchasing behavior by employers: a randomized trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets