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

I.F. Groeneveld, M.F. van Wier, K.I. Proper, J.E. Bosmans, W. van Mechelen, A.J. van der Beek

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of a lifestyle intervention for construction workers with an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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). CONCLUSION: Implementation of this important and effective intervention depends on the societal and employer's willingness to pay. ©2011The American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)610-617
JournalJournal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Volume53
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of a lifestyle intervention for workers in the construction industry at risk for cardiovascular disease'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this