Dataset Information

Workers' Healthcare Assistance Model (WHAM): Development, Validation, and Assessment of Sustainable Return on Investment (S-ROI).

ABSTRACT: The present study aimed to present and validate the Worker´s Healthcare Assistance Model (WHAM), which includes an interdisciplinary approach to health risk management in search of integral and integrated health, considering economic sustainability. Through the integration of distinct methodological strategies, WHAM was developed in the period from 2011 to 2018, in a workers' occupational health centre in the oil industry in Bahia, Brazil. The study included a sample of 965 workers, 91.7% of which were men, with a mean age of 44.9 years (age ranged from 23 to 73 years). The Kendall rank correlation coefficient and hierarchical multiple regression analysis were used for the validation of WHAM. The assessment of sustainable return on investment (S-ROI) was made using the WELLCAST ROI™ decision support tool, covering workers with heart disease and diabetes. WHAM can be considered an innovative healthcare model, as there is no available comparative model. WHAM is considered robust, with 86% health risk explanatory capacity and with an 85.5% S-ROI. It can be concluded that WHAM is a model capable of enhancing the level of workers' health in companies, reducing costs for employers and improving the quality of life within the organization.

SUBMITTER: Viterbo LMF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7246570 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Workers' Healthcare Assistance Model (WHAM): Development, Validation, and Assessment of Sustainable Return on Investment (S-ROI).

Viterbo Lilian Monteiro Ferrari LMF Costa André Santana AS Vidal Diogo Guedes DG Dinis Maria Alzira Pimenta MAP

International journal of environmental research and public health 20200430 9

The present study aimed to present and validate the Worker´s Healthcare Assistance Model (WHAM), which includes an interdisciplinary approach to health risk management in search of integral and integrated health, considering economic sustainability. Through the integration of distinct methodological strategies, WHAM was developed in the period from 2011 to 2018, in a workers' occupational health centre in the oil industry in Bahia, Brazil. The study included a sample of 965 workers, 91.7% of whi ...[more]

PMID: 32365961

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundReturn on Investment (ROI), whereby the ratio of costs to benefits is assessed, is encouraged in-order to justify the value of Quality Improvement (QI) programmes. We previously performed a literature review to develop a ROI conceptual framework for QI programmes. We concluded that, QI-ROI is conceptualised as any monetary and non-monetary benefit. In the current study, we explored if this finding is shared by mental healthcare leaders. We also investigated the stability of this conceptualisation against influencing factors and potential for disinvestment.MethodsWe performed qualitative interviews with leaders in an NHS mental health organisation. There were 16 participants: nine board members and seven senior leaders. The interviews were held online via Microsoft Teams and lasted an hour on average. We performed deductive-inductive analysis to seek data from our initial ROI framework and any new data.ResultsWe found that in mental healthcare, QI-ROI is also conceptualised as any valued monetary and non-monetary benefits. There was a strong emphasis on benefits to external partners and a de-emphasis of benefit monetisation. This conceptualisation was influenced by the 1) perceived mandates to improve quality and manage scarce resources, 2) expectations from QI, 3) health and social care values, 4) ambiguity over expectations, and 5) uncertainty over outcomes. Uncertainty, ambiguity, and potential for disinvestment posed a threat to the stability of this conceptualisation but did not ultimately change it. Health and social care values supported maintaining the QI-ROI as any benefit, with a focus on patients and staff outcomes. Socio-political desires to improve quality were strong drivers for QI investment.ConclusionMental healthcare leaders primarily conceptualise QI-ROI as any valued benefit. The inclusion of externalised outcomes which are hard to attribute may be challenging. However, mental healthcare services do collaborate with external partners. The de-emphases of benefit monetisation may also be controversial due to the need for financial accountability. Mental healthcare leaders recognise the importance of efficiency savings. However, they raised concerns over the legitimacy and utility of traditional ROI as a tool for assessing QI value. Further research is needed to bring more clarity on these aspects of the QI-ROI concept.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies have described increased occurrence of asthma among healthcare workers, but to our knowledge there are no validated survey questionnaires with which to study this occupational group.AimsTo develop, validate, and refine a new survey instrument on asthma for use in epidemiological studies of healthcare workers.MethodsAn initial draft questionnaire, designed by a multidisciplinary team, used previously validated questions where possible; the occupational exposure section was developed by updating health services specific chemical lists through hospital walk-through surveys and review of material safety data sheets. A cross-sectional validation study was conducted in 118 non-smoking subjects, who also underwent bronchial challenge testing, an interview with an industrial hygienist, and measurement of specific IgE antibodies to common aeroallergens.ResultsThe final version consisted of 43 main questions in four sections. Time to completion of the questionnaire ranged from 13 to 25 minutes. Test-retest reliability of asthma and allergy items ranged from 75% to 94%, and internal consistency for these items was excellent (Cronbach's alpha > or = 0.86). Against methacholine challenge, an eight item combination of asthma related symptoms had a sensitivity of 71% and specificity of 70%; against a physician diagnosis of asthma, this same combination showed a sensitivity of 79% and specificity of 98%. Agreement between self-reported exposures and industrial hygienist review was similar to previous studies and only moderate, indicating the need to incorporate more reliable methods of exposure assessment. Against the aerollergen panel, the best combinations of sensitivity and specificity were obtained for a history of allergies to dust, dust mite, and animals.ConclusionsInitial evaluation of this new questionnaire indicates good validity and reliability, and further field testing and cross-validation in a larger healthcare worker population is in progress. The need for development of more reliable occupational exposure assessment methods that go beyond self-report is underscored.

Project description:BackgroundWe previously developed a Quality Improvement (QI) Return-on-Investment (ROI) conceptual framework for large-scale healthcare QI programmes. We defined ROI as any monetary or non-monetary value or benefit derived from QI. We called the framework the QI-ROI conceptual framework. The current study describes the different categories of benefits covered by this framework and explores the relationships between these benefits.MethodsWe searched Medline, Embase, Global health, PsycInfo, EconLit, NHS EED, Web of Science, Google Scholar, organisational journals, and citations, using ROI or returns-on-investment concepts (e.g., cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, value) combined with healthcare and QI. Our analysis was informed by Complexity Theory in view of the complexity of large QI programmes. We used Framework analysis to analyse the data using a preliminary ROI conceptual framework that was based on organisational obligations towards its stakeholders. Included articles discussed at least three organisational benefits towards these obligations, with at least one financial or patient benefit. We synthesized the different QI benefits discussed.ResultsWe retrieved 10 428 articles. One hundred and two (102) articles were selected for full text screening. Of these 34 were excluded and 68 included. Included articles were QI economic, effectiveness, process, and impact evaluations as well as conceptual literature. Based on these literatures, we reviewed and updated our QI-ROI conceptual framework from our first study. Our QI-ROI conceptual framework consists of four categories: 1) organisational performance, 2) organisational development, 3) external outcomes, and 4) unintended outcomes (positive and negative). We found that QI benefits are interlinked, and that ROI in large-scale QI is not merely an end-outcome; there are earlier benefits that matter to organisations that contribute to overall ROI. Organisations also found positive aspects of negative unintended consequences, such as learning from failed QI.Discussion and conclusionOur analysis indicated that the QI-ROI conceptual framework is made-up of multi-faceted and interconnected benefits from large-scale QI programmes. One or more of these may be desirable depending on each organisation's goals and objectives, as well as stage of development. As such, it is possible for organisations to deduce incremental benefits or returns-on-investments throughout a programme lifecycle that are relevant and legitimate.

Project description:Rheumatic Heart Disease (RHD) remains endemic in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) despite its virtual elimination in high-income countries. RHD Action was launched to amplify global efforts to control RHD in 2015 by World Heart Federation and Reach, with demonstration projects in Uganda and Tanzania, and support from Medtronic Foundation. The Small Grants Programme focuses on three domains: People and Communities, Medicines and Technologies, and Systems and Services. It is designed to support patient and community groups in promoting awareness, advocacy, and to build health workers' capacity to prevent and treat RHD in LMICs. Our study evaluates the impact and effectiveness of the RHD Action Small Grants Programme. Methods: We conducted a mixed method study that involved both quantitative and qualitative surveys, through phone interviews and online surveys amongst the grant beneficiaries, to assess the impact and effectiveness of the small grant programme. An invitation to complete an online survey, using a Google Forms format, was issued to Small Grant Project Directors and Co-Directors that received funding for projects between 2017 and 2019. The online survey requested basic project information using tick boxes, Likert scales, and short answer open-ended questions about successes and challenges faced by recipients. The questionnaire also addressed recipients' experience with the RHD Action Small Grants process - applying for the grant, nature and quality of support received to carry out project, the reporting process, and any media coverage provided. For the phone interviews, responses to the short-answer questions were used as the basis for follow up phone interviews. The discussions were recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed for new and recurring themes emerging from the in-depth discussions. Initiated in 2017, RHD Action has funded 21 proposals from a pool of 60 submissions. Recipient countries include Zambia, Uganda (2), Namibia, Kenya, Malawi (2), Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria (3), Rwanda (2), Mozambique, and Cameroon (2) as well as Fiji (2), the Philippines and Nepal. Five recipients were funded in 2017, eight in 2018 and eight in 2019. Project directors are primarily junior doctors and project managers supervised by senior mentors. In most cases, this is their first funding award. These projects have demonstrated tangible impact and have provided content for first manuscript and abstract submissions and presentations at professional conferences. Grant reports are presented as website stories showcasing the achievements of small local efforts with meaningful impact. For RHD Action, there is large return on a modest monetary investment resulting in a very visible, viable global RHD networking platform for enthusiastic community and provider activists.

Project description:IntroductionThe SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has involved healthcare workers (HCWs) both as caregivers and as patients. This study is a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of the HCWs working in a third-level hospital in Central Italy who were infected with COVID-19 from March 2020 to April 2021. This research aims at identifying the physical and mental health outcomes of HCWs infected with COVID-19 who returned to work after the infection, the determinants of those outcomes, such as age and sex, and the identification of possible vulnerable professional groups.MethodsA questionnaire about the acute illness, the experience of returning to work, and health perceptions after the disease was administered to 427 healthcare workers 3 months after recovering from the SARS-CoV-2 infection.ResultsThe majority interviewed (84.5%) reported symptoms at the time of the positive test, with no significant differences regarding age or sex, while a significant difference in the mean age was found regarding hospitalization (p < 0.001). At 3 months after the infection, females (p = 0.001), older workers (p < 0.001), and healthcare assistants (p < 0.001) were more likely to report persistent symptoms. Sex (p = 0.02) and age (p = 0.006) influenced the quality of sleep after the infection. At work, the nurses group reported increase in workload (p = 0.03) and worse relationships (p = 0.028). At 3 months after the infection, female workers perceived worse physical (p = 0.002) and mental (p < 0.001) health status according to the SF-12. A negative correlation was found between age and PCS score (p < 0.001) but not MCS score (p = 0.86). A significant difference in PCS score was found between nurses and physicians (p = 0.04) and between residents and all other groups (p < 0.001). Finally, the group of workers reporting sleep alterations showed lower PCS and MCS scores (p < 0.001) and working relationships had an impact on MCS scores (p < 0.001).ConclusionsAge, sex, and type of job had an impact on physical and mental outcomes. Organizing specific interventions, also tailored to professional sub-groups, should be a target for healthcare systems to protect and boost the physical and mental health of their workers.

Dataset Information

Workers' Healthcare Assistance Model (WHAM): Development, Validation, and Assessment of Sustainable Return on Investment (S-ROI).

Publications

Workers' Healthcare Assistance Model (WHAM): Development, Validation, and Assessment of Sustainable Return on Investment (S-ROI).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets