A cost-effectiveness and return-on-investment analysis of a worksite vitality intervention among older hospital workers: results of a randomized controlled trial.
rct · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 23439274.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1097/JOM.0b013e31827b738e.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To conduct a cost-effectiveness and return-on-investment analysis comparing a worksite vitality intervention with usual care. A total of 730 older hospital workers were randomized to the intervention or control group. The 6-month intervention consisted of yoga and aerobic exercising, coaching, and fruit. At baseline, and 6 and 12 months, general vitality, work-related vitality, and need for recovery were determined. Cost data were collected on a 3-monthly basis. The cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the societal perspective and the return-on-investment analysis from the employer's perspective using bootstrapping techniques. No significant differences in costs and effects were observed. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in terms of general vitality (range, 0 to 100), work-related vitality (range, 0 to 6), and need for recovery (range, 0 to 100) were, respectively, €280, €7506, and €258 per point improvement. Per euro invested, €2.21 was lost. The intervention was neither cost-effective nor cost-saving.
Medical subject headings
- Health Promotion
- Hospitals, University
- Occupational Diseases
- Occupational Health
- Personnel, Hospital