Implementing interventions to reduce work-related stress among health-care workers: an investment appraisal from the employer's perspective.
Employee perspective
Intervention
Investment appraisal
Prevention
Work stress
Journal
International archives of occupational and environmental health
ISSN: 1432-1246
Titre abrégé: Int Arch Occup Environ Health
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 7512134
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2020
01 2020
Historique:
received:
29
01
2019
accepted:
19
08
2019
pubmed:
28
8
2019
medline:
15
12
2020
entrez:
28
8
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Stress-Prevention@Work implementation strategy has been demonstrated to be successful in reducing stress in employees. Now, we assess the economic return-on-investment to see if it would make for a favourable business case for employers. Data were collected from 303 health-care workers assigned to either a waitlisted control condition (142 employees in 15 teams) or to Stress-Prevention@Work (161 employees in 15 teams). Main outcome was productivity losses measured using the Trimbos and iMTA Cost questionnaire in Psychiatry. Measurements were taken at baseline, 6, and 12 months post-baseline. The per-employee costs of the strategy were €50. Net monetary benefits were the benefits (i.e., improved productivity) minus the costs (i.e., intervention costs) and were the main outcome of this investment appraisal. Per-employee net benefits amounted to €2981 on average, which was an almost 60-fold payout of the initial investment of €50. There was a 96.7% likelihood for the modest investment of €50 to be offset by cost savings within 1 year. Moreover, a net benefit of at least €1000 still has a likelihood of 88.2%. In general, there was a high likelihood that Stress-Prevention@Work offers an appealing business case from the perspective of employers, but the employer should factor in the additional per-employee costs of the stress-reducing interventions. Still, if these additional costs were as high as €2981, then costs and benefits would break even. This study was registered in the Netherlands National Trial Register, trial code: NTR5527.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31451925
doi: 10.1007/s00420-019-01471-y
pii: 10.1007/s00420-019-01471-y
pmc: PMC6989605
doi:
Banques de données
NTR
['NTR5527']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
123-132Subventions
Organisme : ZonMw
ID : reference number: 50-51510-98-302
Pays : International
Références
Am J Ind Med. 2014 Jan;57(1):56-68
pubmed: 24166711
J Occup Environ Med. 2005 Nov;47(11):1099-109
pubmed: 16282870
Health Educ Res. 2017 Oct 1;32(5):384-398
pubmed: 28931167
BMC Public Health. 2018 May 21;18(1):642
pubmed: 29784044
Appl Ergon. 2011 Jan;42(2):261-96
pubmed: 20850109
BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2016 Jun;6(2):160-9
pubmed: 25812579
Value Health. 2013 Mar-Apr;16(2):231-50
pubmed: 23538175
Scand J Work Environ Health. 2008 Jun;34(3):169-78
pubmed: 18728906
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2014 Sep;130(3):181-92
pubmed: 24697518
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Oct 31;15(11):
pubmed: 30384455
BMC Med. 2010 Mar 24;8:18
pubmed: 20334633
Hum Resour Health. 2015 May 24;13:38
pubmed: 26003337
J Occup Environ Med. 2016 Jun;58(6):550-60
pubmed: 27281638
Prev Med. 2016 Oct;91:188-196
pubmed: 27527576
BMC Public Health. 2017 Jul 17;18(1):26
pubmed: 28716117
Scand J Work Environ Health. 2018 Nov 1;44(6):613-621
pubmed: 30033477
J Occup Environ Med. 2002 Apr;44(4):320-30
pubmed: 11977418
Annu Rev Public Health. 2013;34:337-54
pubmed: 23297662
J Occup Environ Med. 2014 Sep;56(9):927-34
pubmed: 25153303
Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2019 Feb;28(1):21-30
pubmed: 29486804
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 07;(4):CD002892
pubmed: 25847433
Int J Nurs Stud. 2014 Oct;51(10):1321-31
pubmed: 24598375
Hum Resour Health. 2009 Feb 13;7:10
pubmed: 19216772
Nurs Outlook. 2005 Nov-Dec;53(6):291-9
pubmed: 16360700
Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2015;28(5):891-900
pubmed: 26224500