Implementing interventions to reduce work-related stress among health-care workers: an investment appraisal from the employer’s perspective
Purpose 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. Methods Data were collected from 303 health-care w...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International archives of occupational and environmental health 2020-01, Vol.93 (1), p.123-132 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 132 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 123 |
container_title | International archives of occupational and environmental health |
container_volume | 93 |
creator | Wijnen, Ben F. M. Lokkerbol, Joran Boot, Cecile Havermans, Bo M. van der Beek, Allard J. Smit, Filip |
description | Purpose
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.
Methods
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.
Results
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%.
Conclusions
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. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00420-019-01471-y |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6989605</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2280213603</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c540t-3cf5c06e7ea4f60330a01b37d8202258e71de45d4549c97ac46be58386f6ed8f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UUtu1DAYthAVHQYuwAJZYh34_UzCAglVFCpV6gbWlsf5M5OSxMH2DJodF-AAvR4nwSF9wIaFZVnf0_oIecHgNQMo30QAyaEAVucjS1YcH5EVk4IXjEv9mKxAyBkW7JQ8jfEagJW6FE_IqWBSsZqrFfl5MUw9DjimbtzSbkwYDvPDj5EmTwM2e4f0uw9fi4C9TdjQmALGSO3gs2KHtk-7wtmwsDDEt9SO2emAMc2-1E5TsF20PW2DH2jaIcUc6o8Yfv24iXTKmgld6g74jJy0to_4_PZeky_nHz6ffSourz5enL2_LJySkArhWuVAY4lWthqEAAtsI8qm4sC5qrBkDUrVSCVrV5fWSb1BVYlKtxqbqhVr8m7xnfabARuXawbbmyl0gw1H421n_kXGbme2_mB0XdUaVDZ4dWsQ_Ld9_qm59vsw5s6G8wo4E3OtNeELywUfY8D2PoGBmSc0y4QmT2j-TGiOWfTy7273krvNMkEshJihcYvhIfs_tr8B8oGtfQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2280213603</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Implementing interventions to reduce work-related stress among health-care workers: an investment appraisal from the employer’s perspective</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Wijnen, Ben F. M. ; Lokkerbol, Joran ; Boot, Cecile ; Havermans, Bo M. ; van der Beek, Allard J. ; Smit, Filip</creator><creatorcontrib>Wijnen, Ben F. M. ; Lokkerbol, Joran ; Boot, Cecile ; Havermans, Bo M. ; van der Beek, Allard J. ; Smit, Filip</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
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.
Methods
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.
Results
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%.
Conclusions
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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0340-0131</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-1246</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00420-019-01471-y</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31451925</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Absenteeism ; Adult ; Cost control ; Costs ; Earth and Environmental Science ; Employee benefits ; Employees ; Employers ; Environment ; Environmental Health ; Female ; Health care ; Health Personnel ; Humans ; Investment ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Netherlands ; NTR ; NTR5527 ; Occupational health ; Occupational Health - economics ; Occupational Medicine/Industrial Medicine ; Occupational stress ; Occupational Stress - economics ; Occupational Stress - prevention & control ; Original ; Original Article ; Presenteeism - statistics & numerical data ; Prevention ; Productivity ; Psychiatry ; Rehabilitation ; Stress, Psychological - prevention & control ; Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><ispartof>International archives of occupational and environmental health, 2020-01, Vol.93 (1), p.123-132</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2019</rights><rights>International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health is a copyright of Springer, (2019). All Rights Reserved. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c540t-3cf5c06e7ea4f60330a01b37d8202258e71de45d4549c97ac46be58386f6ed8f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c540t-3cf5c06e7ea4f60330a01b37d8202258e71de45d4549c97ac46be58386f6ed8f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7993-1905</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00420-019-01471-y$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00420-019-01471-y$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31451925$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wijnen, Ben F. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lokkerbol, Joran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boot, Cecile</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Havermans, Bo M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Beek, Allard J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smit, Filip</creatorcontrib><title>Implementing interventions to reduce work-related stress among health-care workers: an investment appraisal from the employer’s perspective</title><title>International archives of occupational and environmental health</title><addtitle>Int Arch Occup Environ Health</addtitle><addtitle>Int Arch Occup Environ Health</addtitle><description>Purpose
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.
Methods
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.
Results
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%.
Conclusions
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.</description><subject>Absenteeism</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Cost control</subject><subject>Costs</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Employee benefits</subject><subject>Employees</subject><subject>Employers</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Environmental Health</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Health care</subject><subject>Health Personnel</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Investment</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Netherlands</subject><subject>NTR</subject><subject>NTR5527</subject><subject>Occupational health</subject><subject>Occupational Health - economics</subject><subject>Occupational Medicine/Industrial Medicine</subject><subject>Occupational stress</subject><subject>Occupational Stress - economics</subject><subject>Occupational Stress - prevention & control</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Presenteeism - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Prevention</subject><subject>Productivity</subject><subject>Psychiatry</subject><subject>Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Stress, Psychological - prevention & control</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><issn>0340-0131</issn><issn>1432-1246</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UUtu1DAYthAVHQYuwAJZYh34_UzCAglVFCpV6gbWlsf5M5OSxMH2DJodF-AAvR4nwSF9wIaFZVnf0_oIecHgNQMo30QAyaEAVucjS1YcH5EVk4IXjEv9mKxAyBkW7JQ8jfEagJW6FE_IqWBSsZqrFfl5MUw9DjimbtzSbkwYDvPDj5EmTwM2e4f0uw9fi4C9TdjQmALGSO3gs2KHtk-7wtmwsDDEt9SO2emAMc2-1E5TsF20PW2DH2jaIcUc6o8Yfv24iXTKmgld6g74jJy0to_4_PZeky_nHz6ffSourz5enL2_LJySkArhWuVAY4lWthqEAAtsI8qm4sC5qrBkDUrVSCVrV5fWSb1BVYlKtxqbqhVr8m7xnfabARuXawbbmyl0gw1H421n_kXGbme2_mB0XdUaVDZ4dWsQ_Ld9_qm59vsw5s6G8wo4E3OtNeELywUfY8D2PoGBmSc0y4QmT2j-TGiOWfTy7273krvNMkEshJihcYvhIfs_tr8B8oGtfQ</recordid><startdate>20200101</startdate><enddate>20200101</enddate><creator>Wijnen, Ben F. M.</creator><creator>Lokkerbol, Joran</creator><creator>Boot, Cecile</creator><creator>Havermans, Bo M.</creator><creator>van der Beek, Allard J.</creator><creator>Smit, Filip</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7993-1905</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200101</creationdate><title>Implementing interventions to reduce work-related stress among health-care workers: an investment appraisal from the employer’s perspective</title><author>Wijnen, Ben F. M. ; Lokkerbol, Joran ; Boot, Cecile ; Havermans, Bo M. ; van der Beek, Allard J. ; Smit, Filip</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c540t-3cf5c06e7ea4f60330a01b37d8202258e71de45d4549c97ac46be58386f6ed8f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Absenteeism</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Cost control</topic><topic>Costs</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Employee benefits</topic><topic>Employees</topic><topic>Employers</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Environmental Health</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Health care</topic><topic>Health Personnel</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Investment</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Netherlands</topic><topic>NTR</topic><topic>NTR5527</topic><topic>Occupational health</topic><topic>Occupational Health - economics</topic><topic>Occupational Medicine/Industrial Medicine</topic><topic>Occupational stress</topic><topic>Occupational Stress - economics</topic><topic>Occupational Stress - prevention & control</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Presenteeism - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Prevention</topic><topic>Productivity</topic><topic>Psychiatry</topic><topic>Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Stress, Psychological - prevention & control</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wijnen, Ben F. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lokkerbol, Joran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boot, Cecile</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Havermans, Bo M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Beek, Allard J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smit, Filip</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>International archives of occupational and environmental health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wijnen, Ben F. M.</au><au>Lokkerbol, Joran</au><au>Boot, Cecile</au><au>Havermans, Bo M.</au><au>van der Beek, Allard J.</au><au>Smit, Filip</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Implementing interventions to reduce work-related stress among health-care workers: an investment appraisal from the employer’s perspective</atitle><jtitle>International archives of occupational and environmental health</jtitle><stitle>Int Arch Occup Environ Health</stitle><addtitle>Int Arch Occup Environ Health</addtitle><date>2020-01-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>93</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>123</spage><epage>132</epage><pages>123-132</pages><issn>0340-0131</issn><eissn>1432-1246</eissn><abstract>Purpose
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.
Methods
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.
Results
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%.
Conclusions
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.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>31451925</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00420-019-01471-y</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7993-1905</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0340-0131 |
ispartof | International archives of occupational and environmental health, 2020-01, Vol.93 (1), p.123-132 |
issn | 0340-0131 1432-1246 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6989605 |
source | MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
subjects | Absenteeism Adult Cost control Costs Earth and Environmental Science Employee benefits Employees Employers Environment Environmental Health Female Health care Health Personnel Humans Investment Male Middle Aged Netherlands NTR NTR5527 Occupational health Occupational Health - economics Occupational Medicine/Industrial Medicine Occupational stress Occupational Stress - economics Occupational Stress - prevention & control Original Original Article Presenteeism - statistics & numerical data Prevention Productivity Psychiatry Rehabilitation Stress, Psychological - prevention & control Surveys and Questionnaires |
title | Implementing interventions to reduce work-related stress among health-care workers: an investment appraisal from the employer’s perspective |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-12T19%3A43%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Implementing%20interventions%20to%20reduce%20work-related%20stress%20among%20health-care%20workers:%20an%20investment%20appraisal%20from%20the%20employer%E2%80%99s%20perspective&rft.jtitle=International%20archives%20of%20occupational%20and%20environmental%20health&rft.au=Wijnen,%20Ben%20F.%20M.&rft.date=2020-01-01&rft.volume=93&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=123&rft.epage=132&rft.pages=123-132&rft.issn=0340-0131&rft.eissn=1432-1246&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00420-019-01471-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2280213603%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2280213603&rft_id=info:pmid/31451925&rfr_iscdi=true |