Dataset Information

Comparison of Employer Productivity Metrics to Lost Productivity Estimated by Commonly Used Questionnaires.

ABSTRACT: The aim of the study was to assess construct and discriminant validity of four health-related work productivity loss questionnaires in relation to employer productivity metrics, and to describe variation in economic estimates of productivity loss provided by the questionnaires in healthy workers.Fifty-eight billing office workers completed surveys including health information and four productivity loss questionnaires. Employer productivity metrics and work hours were also obtained.Productivity loss questionnaires were weakly to moderately correlated with employer productivity metrics. Workers with more health complaints reported greater health-related productivity loss than healthier workers, but showed no loss on employer productivity metrics. Economic estimates of productivity loss showed wide variation among questionnaires, yet no loss of actual productivity.Additional studies are needed comparing questionnaires with objective measures in larger samples and other industries, to improve measurement methods for health-related productivity loss.

SUBMITTER: Gardner BT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5009902 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of Employer Productivity Metrics to Lost Productivity Estimated by Commonly Used Questionnaires.

Gardner Bethany T BT Dale Ann Marie AM Buckner-Petty Skye S Van Dillen Linda L Amick Benjamin C BC Evanoff Bradley B

Journal of occupational and environmental medicine 20160201 2

<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of the study was to assess construct and discriminant validity of four health-related work productivity loss questionnaires in relation to employer productivity metrics, and to describe variation in economic estimates of productivity loss provided by the questionnaires in healthy workers.<h4>Methods</h4>Fifty-eight billing office workers completed surveys including health information and four productivity loss questionnaires. Employer productivity metrics and work hours ...[more]

PMID: 26849261

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNational working groups identify the need for return on investment research conducted from the purchaser perspective; however, the field has not developed standardized methods for measuring the basic components of return on investment, including costing out the value of work productivity loss due to illness. Recent literature is divided on whether the most commonly used method underestimates or overestimates this loss. The goal of this manuscript is to characterize between and within variation in the cost of work productivity loss from illness estimated by the most commonly used method and its two refinements.MethodsOne senior health benefit specialist from each of 325 companies employing 100+ workers completed a cross-sectional survey describing their company size, industry and policies/practices regarding work loss which allowed the research team to derive the variables needed to estimate work productivity loss from illness using three methods. Compensation estimates were derived by multiplying lost work hours from presenteeism and absenteeism by wage/fringe. Disruption correction adjusted this estimate to account for co-worker disruption, while friction correction accounted for labor substitution. The analysis compared bootstrapped means and medians between and within these three methods.ResultsThe average company realized an annual $617 (SD = $75) per capita loss from depression by compensation methods and a $649 (SD = $78) loss by disruption correction, compared to a $316 (SD = $58) loss by friction correction (p < .0001). Agreement across estimates was 0.92 (95% CI 0.90, 0.93).ConclusionAlthough the methods identify similar companies with high costs from lost productivity, friction correction reduces the size of compensation estimates of productivity loss by one half. In analyzing the potential consequences of method selection for the dissemination of interventions to employers, intervention developers are encouraged to include friction methods in their estimate of the economic value of interventions designed to improve absenteeism and presenteeism. Business leaders in industries where labor substitution is common are encouraged to seek friction corrected estimates of return on investment. Health policy analysts are encouraged to target the dissemination of productivity enhancing interventions to employers with high losses rather than all employers.Trial registrationClinical trials registration numberNCT01013220.

Dataset Information

Comparison of Employer Productivity Metrics to Lost Productivity Estimated by Commonly Used Questionnaires.

Publications

Comparison of Employer Productivity Metrics to Lost Productivity Estimated by Commonly Used Questionnaires.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets