Cost and Return on Investment of a Work-Family Intervention in the Extended Care Industry: Evidence From the Work, Family, and Health Network.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Dowd WN
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5633508 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Cost and Return on Investment of a Work-Family Intervention in the Extended Care Industry: Evidence From the Work, Family, and Health Network.
Dowd William N WN Bray Jeremy W JW Barbosa Carolina C Brockwood Krista K Kaiser David J DJ Mills Michael J MJ Hurtado David A DA Wipfli Brad B
Journal of occupational and environmental medicine 20171001 10
<h4>Objective</h4>To estimate the cost and return on investment (ROI) of an intervention targeting work-family conflict (WFC) in the extended care industry.<h4>Methods</h4>Costs to deliver the intervention during a group-randomized controlled trial were estimated, and data on organizational costs-presenteeism, health care costs, voluntary termination, and sick time-were collected from interviews and administrative data. Generalized linear models were used to estimate the intervention's impact on ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Schedule control and supervisor support for family and personal life are work resources that may help employees manage the work-family interface. However, existing data and designs have made it difficult to conclusively identify the effects of these work resources. This analysis utilizes a group-randomized trial in which some units in an information technology workplace were randomly assigned to participate in an initiative, called STAR, that targeted work practices, interactions, and expectations by (a) training supervisors on the value of demonstrating support for employees' personal lives and (b) prompting employees to reconsider when and where they work. We find statistically significant, though modest, improvements in employees' work-family conflict and family time adequacy and larger changes in schedule control and supervisor support for family and personal life. We find no evidence that this intervention increased work hours or perceived job demands, as might have happened with increased permeability of work across time and space. Subgroup analyses suggest the intervention brings greater benefits to employees more vulnerable to work-family conflict. This study advances our understanding of the impact of social structures on individual lives by investigating deliberate organizational changes and their effects on work resources and the work-family interface with a rigorous design.
| S-EPMC4208075 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the health-economic costs and benefits of a guided eHealth intervention (E-health module embedded in Collaborative Occupational healthcare (ECO)) encouraging sick-listed employees to a faster return to work. DESIGN:A two-armed cluster randomised trial with occupational physicians (OPs) (n=62), clustered and randomised by region into an experimental and a control group, to conduct a health-economic investment appraisal. Online self-reported data were collected from employees at baseline, after 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. SETTING:Occupational health care in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS:Employees from small-sized and medium-sized companies (?18 years), sick-listed between 4 and 26 weeks with (symptoms of) common mental disorders visiting their OP. INTERVENTIONS:In the intervention group, employees (N=131) received an eHealth module aimed at changing cognitions regarding return to work, while OPs were supported by a decision aid for treatment and referral options. Employees in the control condition (N=89) received usual sickness guidance. OUTCOMES MEASURES:Net benefits and return on investment based on absenteeism, presenteeism, health care use and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. RESULTS:From the employer's perspective, the incremental net benefits were €3187 per employee over a single year, representing a return of investment of €11 per invested Euro, with a break-even point at 6 months. The economic case was also favourable from the employee's perspective, partly because of QALY health gains. The intervention was costing €234 per employee from a health service financier's perspective. The incremental net benefits from a social perspective were €4210. This amount dropped to €3559 in the sensitivity analysis trimming the 5% highest costs. CONCLUSIONS:The data suggest that the ECO intervention offers good value for money for virtually all stakeholders involved, because initial investments were more than recouped within a single year. The sometimes wide 95% CIs suggest that the costs and benefits are not always very precise estimates and real benefits could vary considerably. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NTR2108; Results.
| S-EPMC5640022 | biostudies-literature
Project description:UnlabelledPolicy Points: The US publicly supported family planning effort serves millions of women and men each year, and this analysis provides new estimates of its positive impact on a wide range of health outcomes and its net savings to the government. The public investment in family planning programs and providers not only helps women and couples avoid unintended pregnancy and abortion, but also helps many thousands avoid cervical cancer, HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, infertility, and preterm and low birth weight births. This investment resulted in net government savings of $13.6 billion in 2010, or $7.09 for every public dollar spent.ContextEach year the United States' publicly supported family planning program serves millions of low-income women. Although the health impact and public-sector savings associated with this program's services extend well beyond preventing unintended pregnancy, they never have been fully quantified.MethodsDrawing on an array of survey data and published parameters, we estimated the direct national-level and state-level health benefits that accrued from providing contraceptives, tests for the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), Pap tests and tests for human papillomavirus (HPV), and HPV vaccinations at publicly supported family planning settings in 2010. We estimated the public cost savings attributable to these services and compared those with the cost of publicly funded family planning services in 2010 to find the net public-sector savings. We adjusted our estimates of the cost savings for unplanned births to exclude some mistimed births that would remain publicly funded if they had occurred later and to include the medical costs for births through age 5 of the child.FindingsIn 2010, care provided during publicly supported family planning visits averted an estimated 2.2 million unintended pregnancies, including 287,500 closely spaced and 164,190 preterm or low birth weight (LBW) births, 99,100 cases of chlamydia, 16,240 cases of gonorrhea, 410 cases of HIV, and 13,170 cases of pelvic inflammatory disease that would have led to 1,130 ectopic pregnancies and 2,210 cases of infertility. Pap and HPV tests and HPV vaccinations prevented an estimated 3,680 cases of cervical cancer and 2,110 cervical cancer deaths; HPV vaccination also prevented 9,000 cases of abnormal sequelae and precancerous lesions. Services provided at health centers supported by the Title X national family planning program accounted for more than half of these benefits. The gross public savings attributed to these services totaled approximately $15.8 billion-$15.7 billion from preventing unplanned births, $123 million from STI/HIV testing, and $23 million from Pap and HPV testing and vaccines. Subtracting $2.2 billion in program costs from gross savings resulted in net public-sector savings of $13.6 billion.ConclusionsPublic expenditures for the US family planning program not only prevented unintended pregnancies but also reduced the incidence and impact of preterm and LBW births, STIs, infertility, and cervical cancer. This investment saved the government billions of public dollars, equivalent to an estimated taxpayer savings of $7.09 for every public dollar spent.
| S-EPMC4266172 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and study aims
An increasing number of cancer survivors are of working age. Cancer is also a known cause of people withdrawing early from the labour market and also a prolonged absence from work due to sickness. Cancer survivors in lower socioeconomic groups (for example, people who do lower skilled jobs) and/or suffer from another disease (co-morbidity) are at particular risk of recurrent sickness absence, unemployment or permanent withdrawal from the labour market. Not being able to work to the same ability and unfavourable work conditions can also mean that cancer survivors of lower socioeconomic status and/or co-morbidity find returning to work more difficult. Support from supervisors and adjustments that make it possible for the cancer survivor to do their job more easily (work accommodations) may be important in preventing sickness relapses due to the job environment affecting their state of health. It is not known how important occupational rehabilitation during cancer treatment might be in helping cancer survivors return to work and, in particular, how it may help those patients of lower socioeconomic status and/or co-morbidity. This study aims to increase the likelihood of cancer survivors returning to work through a programme (intervention) of individual support offered by a job consultant connected to the oncology ward at Aarhus University Hospital.
Who can participate?
Cancer patients between 18 and 60 years of age who are living in Randers or Silkeborg municipalities in Denmark diagnosed with breast, gastro-intestinal, head and neck, testis, ovarian or cervix cancer and being treated with chemotherapy or radiotherapy. They must be permanently or temporary employed (with at least 6 months left of their contract) and possibly on sick leave.
What does the study involve?
Patients that meet the criteria for participating in the trial and living in either Randers or Silkeborg municipalities in Denmark are placed in the intervention group. Patients that meet the criteria but live outside of these municipalities are placed in the control group. Those in the intervention group take part in an early, tailored return to work management programme that supports cancer patients as they are undergoing treatment. Those in the control group are offered the standard sick leave management programme. The return to work rates among cancer survivors in the intervention group is then compared to those in the control group. The effect of the intervention on cancer survivors of lower socioeconomic status and/or co-morbidity is also assessed.
| 2418880 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:Each year, malignant melanoma accounts for 57 000 deaths globally. If current rates continue, there will be an estimated 510 000 new cases annually and 96 000 deaths by 2040. Melanoma and keratinocyte cancers (KCs) incur a large societal burden. Using a mathematical population model, we performed an economic evaluation of the SunSmart program in the state of Western Australia (WA), a primary prevention program to reduce the incidence of skin cancer, versus no program. A societal perspective was taken combining costs to the health system, patients and lost productivity. The model combined data from pragmatic trial evidence of sun protection, epidemiological studies and national cost reports. The main outcomes modelled were societal and government costs, skin cancer counts, melanoma deaths, life years and quality-adjusted life years. Over the next 20 years, the model predicted that implementing the WA SunSmart program would prevent 13 728 KCs, 636 melanomas and 46 melanoma deaths per 100 000 population. Furthermore, 251 life years would be saved, 358 quality-adjusted life years gained and AU$2.95 million in cost savings to society per 100 000 population would be achieved. Key drivers of the model were the rate reduction of benign lesions from sunscreen use, the costs of purchasing sunscreen and the effectiveness of reducing KCs in sunscreen users. The likelihood of WA SunSmart being cost-effective was 90.1%. For the WA Government, the estimated return on investment was $8.70 gained for every $1 invested. Primary prevention of skin cancer is a cost-effective strategy for preventing skin cancers.
| S-EPMC11333957 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Community-based interventions may reduce and prevent childhood obesity by transforming the environments in which children live, learn, and play through a series of interventions implemented throughout the community that encourage healthy behaviors. While empirical support is building for the effectiveness of such interventions, little is known about the economic costs and benefits of community-wide childhood obesity interventions. This study examined whether the benefits of a community-wide, child-focused, obesity prevention intervention, Shape Up Somerville: Eat Smart Play Hard (SUS), exceeded its costs by estimating its return on investment. The SUS intervention study occurred in Somerville, Massachusetts (and in two additional geographic areas, which were the study's control group) during the 2003/04 and 2004/05 school years. We estimated SUS's costs using SUS data over the two-year intervention. We estimated benefits (i.e., healthcare costs and productivity losses averted for children and their parents) over a ten-year time horizon using SUS effectiveness results and other sources. SUS generated an estimated $1.51 in savings for every $1.00 invested in the program (return on investment of $0.51). Over ten years, the estimated costs averted were over $500,000 with net benefits of $197,120 (2014 dollars). SUS was estimated to be a cost-saving intervention when examined over a ten-year time horizon. The excess benefits generated by SUS likely arose from the community-wide nature of the intervention which extended exposure (and estimated benefits) beyond children to parents as well. These results illustrate that allocating resources to community-wide, child-focused obesity prevention interventions may be a beneficial investment.
| S-EPMC6706678 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundWhile school-based health prevention programmes are effective in addressing unhealthy diet and physical inactivity, little is known about their economic implications. We conducted an economic evaluation of the programmes that were previously identified as feasible, acceptable, and sustainable in the Canadian context.MethodsThis study builds on a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of feasible, acceptable, and sustainable school-based health promotion programmes. A micro-simulation model incorporated intervention effects on multiple risk factors to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness and return on investment (ROI) of comprehensive school health (CSH), multicomponent, and physical education (PE) curriculum modification programmes. Cost-effectiveness was expressed as the programme costs below which the programme would be cost-effective at a CA$50 000 threshold level.ResultsThe estimated costs below which interventions were cost-effective per quality-adjusted life year gained were CA$682, CA$444, and CA$416 per student for CSH, multicomponent, and PE curriculum modification programmes, respectively. CSH programmes remained cost-effective per year of chronic disease prevented for costs of up to CA$3384 per student, compared to CA$1911 and CA$1987 for multicomponent and PE curriculum modification interventions, respectively. If the interventions were implemented at total discounted intervention costs of CA$100 per student, ROI through the avoidance of direct healthcare costs related to the treatment and management of chronic diseases would be 824% for CSH, 465% for multicomponent interventions, and 484% for PE curriculum modification interventions.ConclusionsWhereas each examined intervention types showed favourable economic benefits, CSH programmes appeared to be the most cost-effective and to have the highest ROI.
| S-EPMC8643402 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundChild abuse and neglect (CAN) cost United States society $136 billion to $428 billion annually. Preventive interventions that reduce CAN may improve people's lives and generate economic benefits to society, but their magnitude is likely to vary greatly with assumptions about victim costs avoided through intervention.ObjectiveWe examined the implications of different assumptions about avoided victim costs in a benefit-cost analysis of Promoting First Relationships® (PFR), a 10-session attachment and strengths-based home visiting intervention.Participants and settingParticipants were 247 child protection-involved but intact families in Washington State randomized to receive PFR (n = 124) or resource and referral (n = 123).MethodsWe monetized intervention effects on out-of-home placements and implicit effects on CAN and calculated net present values under three scenarios: (1) benefits from avoided system costs, (2) additional benefits from avoided tangible victim costs, and (3) additional benefits from avoided tangible and intangible quality-of-life victim costs. For scenarios 2 and 3, we varied the CAN effect size and estimated the effect size at which PFR was reliably cost beneficial.ResultsPFR's societal net benefit ranged from $1 (scenario 1) to $5514 - $25,562 (scenario 2) and $7004 - $32,072 (scenario 3) (2014 USD). In scenarios 2 and 3, PFR was reliably cost beneficial at a CAN effect size of approximately -0.25.ConclusionsPFR is cost beneficial assuming tangible victim costs are avoided by PFR. Research into the long-term health and economic consequences of reducing CAN in at-risk populations would contribute to comprehensive, accurate benefits models.
| S-EPMC7359609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo address the growing prevalence of hearing loss, WHO has identified a compendium of key evidence-based ear and hearing care interventions to be included within countries' universal health coverage packages. To assess the cost-effectiveness of these interventions and their budgetary effect for countries, we aimed to analyse the investment required to scale up services from baseline to recommended levels, and the return to society for every US$1 invested in the compendium.MethodsWe did a modelling study using the proposed set of WHO interventions (summarised under the acronym HEAR: hearing screening and intervention for newborn babies and infants, pre-school and school-age children, older adults, and adults at higher risk of hearing loss; ear disease prevention and management; access to technologies such as hearing aids, cochlear implants, or hearing assistive technologies; and rehabilitation service provision), which span the life course and include screening and management of hearing loss and related ear diseases, costs and benefits for the national population cohorts of 172 countries. The return on investment was analysed for the period between 2020 and 2030 using three scenarios: a business-as-usual scenario, a progress scenario with a scale-up to 50% of recommended coverage, and an ambitious scenario with scale-up to 90% of recommended coverage. Using data for hearing loss burden from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019, a transition model with three states (general population, diagnosed, and those who have died) was developed to model the national populations in countries. For the return-on-investment analysis, the monetary value of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted in addition to productivity gains were compared against the investment required in each scenario.FindingsScaling up ear and hearing care interventions to 90% requires an overall global investment of US$238·8 billion over 10 years. Over a 10-year period, this investment promises substantial health gains with more than 130 million DALYs averted. These gains translate to a monetary value of more than US$1·3 trillion. In addition, investment in hearing care will result in productivity benefits of more than US$2 trillion at the global level by 2030. Together, these benefits correspond to a return of nearly US$15 for every US$1 invested.InterpretationThis is the first-ever global investment case for integrating ear and hearing care interventions in countries' universal health coverage services. The findings show the economic benefits of investing in this compendium and provide the basis for facilitating the increase of country's health budget for strengthening ear and hearing care services.FundingNone.
| S-EPMC8692586 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Interventions that address socioeconomic determinants of health are receiving considerable attention from policy makers and health care executives. The interest is fueled in part by expected returns on investment. However, many current estimates of returns on investment are likely overestimated, because they are based on pre-post study designs that are susceptible to regression to the mean. We present a return-on-investment analysis that is based on a randomized controlled trial of Individualized Management for Patient-Centered Targets (IMPaCT), a standardized community health worker intervention that addresses unmet social needs for disadvantaged people. We found that every dollar invested in the intervention would return $2.47 to an average Medicaid payer within the fiscal year.
| S-EPMC8564553 | biostudies-literature