Work productivity loss from depression: evidence from an employer survey

BMC Health Services Research

Stanley Xu²  Hongdao Meng³  Kathryn M Rost¹ 

[1] Department of Mental Health Law and Policy, College of Behavioral and Community Studies, University of South Florida, 13301 Bruce B. Downs Boulevard, Tampa 33612, FL, USA;Department of Biostatistics and Informatics, School of Public Health, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, USA;School of Aging Studies, College of Behavioral and Community Studies, University of South Florida, 13301 Bruce B. Downs Boulevard, Tampa 33612, FL, USA

关键词: Health promotion;    Depression;    Productivity;    Work;    Return on investment;   

Others  :  1090029
DOI  :  10.1186/s12913-014-0597-y

 received in 2014-03-04, accepted in 2014-11-10,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

National 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.

Methods

One 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.

Results

The 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).

Conclusion

Although 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 registration

Clinical trials registration number: NCT01013220 webcite.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Rost et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Nyman JA: Productivity costs revisited: toward a new US policy. Health Econ 2011, 21:1387-1401.
• [2]Gold ME, Siegel JE, Russell , Weinstein MC: Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York; 1996.
• [3]Johannesson M, Jonsson B, Jonsson L, Kobelt GU, Zethraeus N: Why Should Economic Evaluations of Medical Innovations Have a Societal Perspective?. Office of Health Economics, London; 2009.
• [4]Drummond SM, Torrance G: Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford University Press, New York NY; 2005.
• [5]Goetzel RZ, Long SR, Ozminkowski RJ, Hawkins K, Wang S, Lunch W: Health, absence, disability and presenteeism cost estimates of certain physical and mental health conditions affecting US employers. J Occup Environ Med 2004, 46:398-412.
• [6]Stewart WF, Ricci JA, Chee E, Morganstein D, Lipton R: Lost productive time and cost due to common pain conditions in the US workforce. JAMA 2003, 290:2443-2454.
• [7]Birnbaum HG, Kessler RC, Kelley D, Ben-Hamadi R, Joish VN, Greenberg PE: Employer burden of mild, moderate, and severe major depressive disorder: mental health services utilization and costs, and work performance. Depress Anxiety 2010, 27:78-89.
• [8]Pauly MV, Nicholson S, Xu J: A general model of the impact of absenteeism on employers and employees. Health Econ 2002, 11:221-231.
• [9]Nicholson S, Pauly MV, Polsky D, Sharda C, Szrek H, Berger ML: Measuring the effects of work loss on productivity with team production. Health Econ 2006, 15:111-123.
• [10]Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF, van Ineveld BM, van Roijen L: The friction cost method for measuring indirect costs of disease. J Health Econ 1995, 14:171-189.
• [11]Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF: The consequence of production loss or increased costs of production. Med Care 1996, 34:9-68.
• [12]Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF: A practical guide for calculating indirect costs of disease. Pharmacoeconomics 1996, 10:460-466.
• [13]Lo Sasso AT, Rost K, Beck A: Modeling the impact of enhanced depression treatment on workplace functioning and costs: a cost-benefit approach. Med Care 2006, 44:352-358.
• [14]Rost K, Smith JL, Dickinson M: The effect of improving primary care depression management on employee absenteeism and productivity: a randomized trial. Med Care 2004, 42:1202-1210.
• [15]Rost KM, Marshall D: Marketing depression care management to employers: design of a randomized controlled trial. Implement Sci 2010, 5:1748-1758. BioMed Central Full Text
• [16]Rost K, Marshall D, Wang S, Xu S, Hagman B: Purchaser preferences in strategies to improve depression treatment. Clin Exp Med Sci 2013, 1:161-175.
• [17]Greenberg PE: Depression in The Workplace: An Economic Perspective. In Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, Advances in Basic Research and Clinical Practice. Edited by Feighner JP, Berger WF. John Wiley and Sons, New York; 1996:327-363.
• [18]Stewart WF, Ricci JA, Chee E: Cost of lost productive work time among US workers with depression. JAMA 2003, 289:3135-3144.
• [19]Nicholson S, Pauly MV, Polsky D, Baase CM, Billotti GM: How to present the business case for healthcare quality to employers. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2005, 4:209-218.
• [20]Pauly MV, Nicholson S, Polsky D, Berger ML, Sharda C: Valuing reductions in on-the-job illness: ‘presenteeism’ from managerial and economic perspectives. Health Econ 2008, 17:469-485.
• [21]Krol M, Brouwer WB, Severens JL, Kaper J, Evers SM: Productivity cost calculations in health economic evaluations: correcting for compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects. Soc Sci Med 2012, 75:981-988.
• [22]Jacob-Tacken KH, Koopmanschap M, Meerding WJ, Severens JL: Correcting for compensating mechanisms related to productivity costs in economic evaluations of health care programmes. Health Econ 2005, 14:435-443.
• [23]Severens JL, Laheiz RJ, Jansen BM, van der Lisdonk EH, Verbeck AL: Estimating the cost of lost productivity in dyspepsia. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1998, 12:919-923.
• [24]Addison JT: Atypical work and pay. South Econ J 2007, 73:1038-1065.
• [25]The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). [http://www.dol.gov/compliance/laws/comp-flsa.htm]
• [26]Zhang W, Bansback N, Anis AH: Measuring and valuing productivity loss due to poor health: a critical review. Soc Sci Med 2011, 72:185-192.
• [27]Uegaki K, du Bruijne MC, Anema JR, van der Beck AJ, van Tulder MW, van Mechelen W: Consensus-based findings and recommendations for estimating the costs of health-related productivity loss from a company’s perspective. Scand J Work Environ Health 2007, 33:122-130.
• [28]Rubin DB: Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. Wiley & Sons, New York NY; 1987.
• [29]Mooney CZ, Duval RD, Duval R: Bootstrapping: A Nonparametric Approach to Statistical Inference. Sage Publications, London; 1993.
• [30]Lin LI: A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 1989, 45:255-268.
• [31]Carrasco JL, Jover L, King TS, Chinchilli VM: Comparison of concordance correlation coefficient estimating approaches with skewed data. J Biopharm Stat 2007, 17:673-684.
• [32]Goetzel RZ, Schoenman JA, Chapman LS, Anderson DR, Ozminkowski RJ, Lindsay GM: Strategies for strengthening the evidence base for employee health promotion programs. Am J Health Promot 2011, 26:TAHP1-TAHP6.
• [33]Sorensen G, Landsbergis P, Hammer L, Amick B, Linnan L, Yancey A: Preventing chronic disease at the workplace: a workshop report and recommendations. Am J Public Health 2011, 101(Supp):196-207.
• [34]Rost K, Papadopoulos A, Wang S, Marshall D: Understanding the “black box” of employer decisions about health insurance benefits: the case of depression products.Risks, in press.
• [35]Society for Human Resources Management: 2013 Employee Benefits: A Research Report. [http://www.shrm.org/Research/SurveyFindings/Articles/Documents/13-0245%202013_EmpBenefits_FNL.pdf]
• [36]Rongen A, Robroek SJ, van Lenthe FJ, Burdorf A: Workplace health promotion: a meta-analysis of effectiveness. Am J Prev Med 2013, 44:406-415.
• [37]Anderson LM, Quinn TA, Glanz K, Ramirez G, Kahwati LC, Johnson DB: The effectiveness of worksite nutrition and physical activity interventions for controlling employee overweight and obesity: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med 2009, 37:340-357.
• [38]Conn VS, Hafdahl AR, Cooper PS, Brown LM, Lusk SL: Meta-analysis of workplace physical activity interventions. J Occup Environ Med 2007, 49:11-21.
• [39]van Dongen JM, Proper KI, van Wier MF, van der Beek AJ, Bongers PM, van Mechelen W: Systematic review on the financial return of worksite health promotion programmes aimed at improving nutration and/or increasing physical activity. Obes Rev 2011, 12:1031-1049.
• [40]Koopmanschap M, Burdorf A, Jacob K, Meerding WJ, Brouwer W, Severens H: Measuring productivity changes in economic evaluation: setting the research agenda. Pharmacoeconomics 2005, 23:47-54.