...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of occupational health >Economic evaluation of an intervention program with the aim to improve at-work productivity for workers with rheumatoid arthritis
【24h】

Economic evaluation of an intervention program with the aim to improve at-work productivity for workers with rheumatoid arthritis

机译:干预计划的经济评价,旨在改善具有类风湿性关节炎的工人的工作效率

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objectives: Evaluating the cost effectiveness and cost utility of an integrated care intervention and participatory workplace intervention for workers with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to improve their work productivity. Methods: Twelve month follow-up economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial (RCT) within specialized rheumatology treatment centers. Adults diagnosed with RA between 18-64 years, in a paid job for at least eight hours per week, experiencing minor difficulties in work functioning were randomized to the intervention (n = 75) or the care-as-usual (CAU) group (n = 75). Effect outcomes were productivity and quality of life (QA-LYs). Costs associated with healthcare, patient and family, productivity, and intervention were calculated from a societal perspective. Cost effectiveness and cost utility were assessed to indicate the incremental costs and benefits per additional unit of effect. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses evaluated the robustness of the findings. Results: At-work productivity loss was about 4.6 hours in the intervention group and 3.5 hours in the care as usual (CAU) group per two weeks. Differences in QALY were negligible; 0.77 for the CAU group and 0.74 for the intervention group. In total, average costs after twelve months follow-up were highest in the intervention group ((sic)7,437.76) compared to the CAU group ((sic)5,758.23). The cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses show that the intervention was less effective and (often) more expensive when compared to CAU. Sensitivity analyses supported these findings. Discussion: The integrated care intervention and participatory workplace intervention for workers with RA provides gains neither in productivity at the workplace nor in quality of life. These results do not justify the additional costs.
机译:目的:评估综合护理干预和参与式工作场所干预的成本效益和成本效用,为具有类风湿性关节炎(RA)的工人,以提高其工作生产率。方法:在专业的风湿病学治疗中心内随机对照试验(RCT),12个月后续经济评估。诊断为18-64岁之间的成年人,在每周至少八小时的有偿工作中,在工作运行中经历轻微的困难被随机化为干预(n = 75)或护理 - 常规(CAU)组( n = 75)。效应结果是生产力和生活质量(QA-Lys)。与医疗保健,患者和家庭,生产力和干预相关的成本是从社会角度计算的。评估成本有效性和成本效用,以表明每额外效应单位的增量成本和益处。亚组和敏感性分析评估了调查结果的稳健性。结果:在干预组中,工作损失约为4.6小时,每两周照顾3.5小时的护理时间(CAU)。 QALY的差异可以忽略不计; CAU集团0.77为干预组0.74。与CAU集团((SIC)5,758.23)相比,在干预组((SIC)7,437.76)中,12个月后续前续的平均成本总计成本效益和成本实用性分析表明,与CAU相比,干预效果较低,(通常)更昂贵。敏感性分析支持这些发现。讨论:与RA工人的综合护理干预和参与式工作场所干预既不提供工作场所的生产力,也不提供生活质量。这些结果不证明额外的成本。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号