19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of a lifestyle intervention for workers in the construction industry at risk for cardiovascular disease.

      Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
      Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Cardiovascular Diseases, prevention & control, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Counseling, economics, methods, Facility Design and Construction, Health Behavior, Health Promotion, Humans, Life Style, Linear Models, Male, Middle Aged, Occupational Health Services, Risk Factors, Weight Loss, Young Adult

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          To investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of a lifestyle intervention for construction workers with an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease. In this randomized controlled trial, usual care was compared to a 6-month individual-based lifestyle intervention. At 6 and 12 months, weight, absenteeism, health care use, and lifestyle-related expenses were determined. Missing data were imputed. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from a societal perspective. Uncertainty around the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated by bootstrapped cost-effect pairs. A cost-benefit analysis was performed from an employer's perspective, subtracting the incremental costs from the incremental benefits. The ICER was € 145/kg weight loss. The difference between intervention and control group in net employer costs was € 254 (95% CI: -1070 to 1536). Implementation of this important and effective intervention depends on the societal and employer's willingness to pay.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article