ORCID Profile
0000-0002-6188-6955
Current Organisations
RMIT University Bundoora Campus
,
University of Tasmania
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 18-09-2015
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 11-10-2015
DOI: 10.1007/S11136-014-0823-4
Abstract: Health utility values permit cost utility analysis in workplace health promotion however, utility measures of working populations have not been validated. To investigate construct validity of SF-6D health utility in a public service workforce. SF-12v2 Health Survey was administered to 3,408 randomly selected public service employees in Australia in 2010. SF-12 scores were converted to SF-6D health utility values. Associations and correlates of SF-6D with health, socio-demographic and work characteristics [comorbidities, body mass index (BMI), Kessler-10 psychological distress (K10), education, salary, effort-reward imbalance (ERI), absenteeism] were explored. Ceiling effects were analysed. Nationally representative employee SF-6D values from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey (n = 11,234) were compared. All analyses were stratified by sex. Mean (SE) age was 45.7 (0.35) males 44.5 (0.22) females. Females represented 72 % of the s le. Mean (SE) health utility 0.792 (0.004) 0.771 (0.003) was higher in males. SF-6D demonstrated both a significant inverse association (p < 0.01) and negative correlations (female male) with K10 (r = -0.63 r = -0.66), comorbidity count (r = -0.40 r = -0.33), ERI (r = -0.37 r = -0.34) and absenteeism (p < 0.005, r = -0.25 r = -0.21). Mean (SE) SF-6D in HILDA was 0.792 (0.002) 0.775 (0.003) males females. Correlates and associations in all s les were similar. The general employed demonstrated a significant inverse association with age and positive association with salary. SF-6D was independent of BMI. Psychological distress, comorbidity, effort-reward imbalance and absenteeism are negatively associated with employee health. SF-6D is a valid measure of perceived health states in working populations.
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 07-2014
DOI: 10.4278/AJHP.130731-LIT-395
Abstract: To determine the relationship between return on investment (ROI) and quality of study methodology in workplace health promotion programs. Data were obtained through a systematic literature search of National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Health Technology Database (HTA), Cost Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) Registry, EconLit, PubMed, Embase, Wiley, and Scopus. Included were articles written in English or German reporting cost(s) and benefit(s) and single or multicomponent health promotion programs on working adults. Return-to-work and workplace injury prevention studies were excluded. Methodological quality was graded using British Medical Journal Economic Evaluation Working Party checklist. Economic outcomes were presented as ROI. ROI was calculated as ROI = (benefits − costs of program)/costs of program. Results were weighted by study size and combined using meta-analysis techniques. Sensitivity analysis was performed using two additional methodological quality checklists. The influences of quality score and important study characteristics on ROI were explored. Fifty-one studies (61 intervention arms) published between 1984 and 2012 included 261,901 participants and 122,242 controls from nine industry types across 12 countries. Methodological quality scores were highly correlated between checklists (r = .84–.93). Methodological quality improved over time. Overall weighted ROI [mean ± standard deviation (confidence interval)] was 1.38 ± 1.97 (1.38–1.39), which indicated a 138% return on investment. When accounting for methodological quality, an inverse relationship to ROI was found. High-quality studies (n= 18) had a smaller mean ROI, 0.26 ± 1.74 (.23–.30), compared to moderate (n= 16) 0.90 ± 1.25 (.90–.91) and low-quality (n= 27) 2.32 ± 2.14 (2.30–2.33) studies. Randomized control trials (RCTs) (n= 12) exhibited negative ROI, −0.22 ± 2.41(–.27 to –.16). Financial returns become increasingly positive across quasi-experimental nonexperimental, and modeled studies: 1.12 ± 2.16 (1.11–1.14), 1.61 ± 0.91 (1.56–1.65), and 2.05 ± 0.88 (2.04–2.06), respectively. Overall, mean weighted ROI in workplace health promotion demonstrated a positive ROI. Higher methodological quality studies provided evidence of smaller financial returns. Methodological quality and study design are important determinants.
No related grants have been discovered for Siyan Baxter.