Presenteeism Costs Research Articles

Cost-Effectiveness of Eszopiclone for the Treatment of Adults with Primary Chronic Insomnia

To assess the cost-effectiveness of treatment with eszopiclone for chronic primary insomnia in adults. A model using patient-level data from a 6-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial (n = 824), combined with data from a claims database and published literature, was used to assess the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and costs associated with eszopiclone versus placebo in adults with primary insomnia. Quality of life data were collected during the trial via the SF-36, from which preference-based utility scores were derived using published algorithms. Medical and absenteeism costs, estimated via a retrospective analysis of a claims and absenteeism database, were assigned to patients based on the degree of severity of their insomnia, assessed via the Insomnia Severity Index collected in the clinical trial. Presenteeism costs (lost productivity while at work) were estimated from responses to the Work Limitation Questionnaire collected during the trial. Six-month gains in QALYs and costs for each treatment group were calculated to derive cost-effectiveness ratios. Uncertainty was addressed via univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses. Over the 6-month period, eszopiclone use resulted in a net gain of 0.0137 QALYs over placebo at an additional cost of $67, resulting in an incremental cost per QALY gained of slightly less than $5,000. When absenteeism and presenteeism costs were excluded, the cost-effectiveness ratio increased to approximately $33,000 per QALY gained, which is below the commonly used threshold of $50,000 used to define cost-effectiveness. Extensive sensitivity analyses indicate the results are generally robust. Our model, based on efficacy data from a clinical trial, demonstrated eszopiclone was cost-effective for the treatment of primary insomnia in adults, especially when lost productivity costs were included.

The Cost and Impact of Health Conditions on Presenteeism to Employers

Employers are becoming concerned with the costs of presenteeism in addition to the healthcare and absenteeism costs that have traditionally been explored. But what is the true impact of health conditions in terms of on-the-job productivity? This article examines the literature to assess the magnitude of presenteeism costs relative to total costs of a variety of health conditions. Searches of MEDLINE, CINAHL and PubMed were conducted in July 2008, with no starting date limitation, using 'presenteeism' or 'work limitations' as keywords. Publications on a variety of health conditions were located and included if they assessed the total healthcare and productivity cost of one or more health conditions. Literature on presenteeism has investigated its link with a large number of health conditions ranging from allergies to irritable bowel syndrome. The cost of presenteeism relative to the total cost varies by condition. In some cases (such as allergies or migraine headaches), the cost of presenteeism is much larger than the direct healthcare cost, while in other cases (such as hypertension or cancer), healthcare is the larger component. Many more studies have examined the impact of pharmaceutical treatment on certain medical conditions and the resulting improvement in on-the-job productivity. Based on the research reviewed here, health conditions are associated with on-the-job productivity losses and presenteeism is a major component of the total employer cost of those conditions, although the exact dollar amount cannot be determined at this time. Interventions, including the appropriate use of pharmaceutical agents, may be helpful in improving the productivity of employees with certain conditions.

P01-110 Assessing the relationship between compliance with antidepressant therapy and costs among employees in the United States

Objective:Assess effects of antidepressant compliance on healthcare and workplace costs.Methods:Using workplace survey data for 2 large employers’ healthcare claims (2004-2006), patient selection criteria considered depression diagnosis and antidepressant claims history. Employed respondents working in the past month were categorized by Medication Possession Ratio into compliance groups by quartiles; bottom/top quartiles were defined as compliant/non-compliant. Direct (medical/drug) costs were measured as insurer payments to providers; indirect (absenteeism/presenteeism) costs were based on one-month recall of workplace performance (hours worked/missed, self-rated performance), estimated as (hours missed x self-reported hourly income). Annualized, inflation-adjusted (2006) costs were compared between compliant/non-compliant groups using multivariate models controlling for baseline characteristics. Analyses were conducted for all patients and a subsample of diagnosed depression patients.Results:Among all patients (n=1,224), medical costs were numerically lower for compliant vs. non-compliant patients ($4,857 vs. $5,926, p=0.221); drug costs were significantly higher for compliant patients ($2,329 vs. $1,570, p=0.001). Indirect costs were not statistically different between compliant/non-compliant patients ($22,278 vs. $20,714, p=0.237). Among the depression subgroup (N=488), medical costs were numerically lower for compliant vs. non-compliant patients ($5,005 vs. $7,630, p=0.152) while drug costs were numerically higher for compliant patients ($2,550 vs. $1,829, p=0.153). Absenteeism costs were 30% lower for compliant patients ($7,725 vs. $11,040, p=0.038); presenteeism costs were not significantly different ($19,079 vs. $17,457, p=0.441).Conclusions:Absenteeism costs decrease significantly with compliance among depressed patients as do medical costs (not significantly). Further research is warranted regarding reason for poor antidepressant compliance and influence of compliance on costs.

Economic Impact according to Health Problems of Workers

The purpose of this study was to examine health problems and to estimate economic impact based on health problems of workers. The subjects of this study consisted of 301 workers who received a group occupational health service. Data was collected from February 1 to March 30, 2006. The questionnaire contained questions based on general characteristics and the Stanford Presenteeism Scale. Data was analyzed with descriptive statistics, t-test using SPSS program. The primary health conditions as reported by workers were ranked in order as stomach or bowel disorders, back or neck disorders, or liver function disorders. The reason of absenteeism per worker was ranked in order as asthma, or a breathing disorder. The reason of presenteeism was ranked in order as asthma, insomnia or a sleep disorder. The cost of the total economic impact on the workplace in this study was 8,851,838 won. The cost of absenteeism per worker was 8,390 won. The cost of presenteeism per worker was 941,732 won. Presenteeism had a strong correlation to health conditions of the workers. Therefore, improving the work conditions of the workers is very important. If employers improve the health condition of workers, they will benefit from improved productivity in their business.

Economic impact of workplace productivity losses due to allergic rhinitis compared with select medical conditions in the United States from an employer perspective

ABSTRACTObjective: To evaluate the cost of lost productivity in the workplace due to allergic rhinitis compared to other selected medical conditions from an employer perspective.Setting and participants: A total of 8267 US employees at 47 employer locations who volunteered to participate in health/wellness screenings.Measurements: The Work Productivity Short Inventory was used to assess the impact of a predefined group of health conditions on workplace productivity for the previous 12 months. Both absenteeism and presenteeism (lost productivity while at work) were recorded. Costs were calculated using a standard hourly wage.Results: Allergic rhinitis was the most prevalent of the selected conditions; 55% of employees reported experiencing allergic rhinitis symptoms for an average of 52.5 days, were absent 3.6 days per year due to the condition, and were unproductive 2.3 h per workday when experiencing symptoms. The mean total productivity (absenteeism + presenteeism) losses per employee per year were US $593 for allergic rhinitis, $518 for high stress, $277 for migraine, $273 for depression, $269 for arthritis/rheumatism, $248 for anxiety disorder, $181 for respiratory infections, $105 for hypertension or high blood pressure, $95 for diabetes, $85 for asthma, and $40 for coronary heart disease. The mean total productivity loss per employee per year due to caregiving was $102 for pediatric respiratory infections, $85 for pediatric allergies, $49 for Alzheimer's disease, and $42 for otitis media/earache.Conclusions: Allergies are major contributors to the total cost of health-related absenteeism and presenteeism. Payers and employers need to consider this when determining health benefits for employees.

Health, absence, disability, and presenteeism cost estimates of certain physical and mental health conditions affecting U.S. employers.

Evidence about the total cost of health, absence, short-term disability, and productivity losses was synthesized for 10 health conditions. Cost estimates from a large medical/absence database were combined with findings from several published productivity surveys. Ranges of condition prevalence and associated absenteeism and presenteeism (on-the-job-productivity) losses were used to estimate condition-related costs. Based on average impairment and prevalence estimates, the overall economic burden of illness was highest for hypertension ($392 per eligible employee per year), heart disease ($368), depression and other mental illnesses ($348), and arthritis ($327). Presenteeism costs were higher than medical costs in most cases, and represented 18% to 60% of all costs for the 10 conditions. Caution is advised when interpreting any particular source of data, and the need for standardization in future research is noted.