A Cost and Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Stand More AT Work (SMArT Work) Intervention
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
2.2. Ethical Considerations
2.3. Analyses Approach
2.4. Intervention Costs
2.5. Measures of Effects
2.6. Cost Benefit Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Intervention Costs
3.2. Measures of Effects
3.3. Cost Benefit
- ∆cost = + £595 (intervention costs) + £97.40 (indirect work loss costs) = + £692.40
- ∆effect (1) = WPAI productivity gain £47.36 per week x 52 weeks = £2462.72
- (95%CI∆ £6.50, £88.22 per week x 52 weeks = £338; £4587.44)
- ∆effect (2) = Archival sickness absence = no difference
- ∆effect (3) = WPAI sickness absence = no difference
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Trial Registration
References
- Wilmot, E.G.; Edwardson, C.L.; Achana, F.A.; Davies, M.J.; Gorely, T.; Gray, L.J.; Khunti, K.; Yates, T.; Biddle, S.J.H. Sedentary time in adults and the association with diabetes, cardiovascular disease and death: systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetologia 2012, 55, 2895–2905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- De Rezende, L.F.M.; Rey-López, J.P.; Matsudo, V.K.R.; Luiz, O.D.C. Sedentary behavior and health outcomes among older adults: A systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2014, 14, 333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Shen, D.; Mao, W.; Liu, T.; Lin, Q.; Lu, X.; Wang, Q.; Lin, F.; Ekelund, U.; Wijndaele, K. Sedentary Behavior and Incident Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e105709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Biswas, A.; Oh, P.I.; Faulkner, G.E.; Bajaj, R.R.; Silver, M.A.; Mitchell, M.S.; Alter, D.A. Sedentary time and its association with risk for disease incidence, mortality, and hospitalization in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann. Intern. Med. 2015, 162, 123–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Teychenne, M.; A Costigan, S.; Parker, K. The association between sedentary behaviour and risk of anxiety: A systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2015, 15, 513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Zhai, L.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, D. Sedentary behaviour and the risk of depression: A meta-analysis. Br. J. Sports Med. 2015, 49, 705–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parry, S.; Straker, L. The contribution of office work to sedentary behaviour associated risk. BMC Public Health. 2013, 13, 296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Healy, G.N.; Eakin, E.G.; Lamontagne, A.D.; Owen, N.; Winkler, E.A.; Wiesner, G.; Gunning, L.; Neuhaus, M.; Lawler, S.; Fjeldsoe, B.S.; et al. Reducing sitting time in office workers: Short-term efficacy of a multicomponent intervention. Prev. Med. 2013, 57, 43–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Clemes, S.A.; O’connell, S.E.; Edwardson, C.L. Office Worker’s Objectively Measured Sedentary Behavior and Physical Activity During and Outside Working Hours. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2014, 56, 298–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hallman, D.M.; Gupta, N.; Mathiassen, S.E.; Holtermann, A. Association between objectively measured sitting time and neck–shoulder pain among blue-collar workers. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 2015, 88, 1031–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Munir, F.; Houdmont, J.; Clemes, S.; Wilson, K.; Kerr, R.; Addley, K. Work engagement and its association with occupational sitting time: Results from the Stormont study. BMC Public Health. 2015, 15, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Brown, H.E.; Ryde, G.C.; Gilson, N.D.; Burton, N.W.; Brown, W.J. Objectively measured sedentary behavior and physical activity in office employees: Relationships with presenteeism. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2013, 55, 945–953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Neuhaus, M.; Healy, G.N.; Fjeldsoe, B.S.; Lawler, S.; Owen, N.; Dunstan, D.W.; Lamontagne, A.D.; Eakin, E.G. Iterative development of Stand Up Australia: A multi-component intervention to reduce workplace sitting. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2014, 11, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Healy, G.N.; Winkler, E.A.; Eakin, E.G.; Owen, N.; Lamontagne, A.D.; Moodie, M.; Dunstan, D.W. A cluster RCT to reduce workers’ sitting time: Impact on cardio-metabolic biomarkers. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2017, 49, 2032–2039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karakolis, T.; Callaghan, J.P. The impact of sit–stand office workstations on worker discomfort and productivity: A review. Appl. Ergon. 2014, 45, 799–806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Danquah, I.H.; Kloster, S.; Holtermann, A.; Aadahl, M.; Bauman, A.; Ersbøll, A.K.; Tolstrup, A.S. Take a Stand!-a multi-component intervention aimed at reducing sitting time among office workers-a cluster randomized trial. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2017, 46, 128–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dunstan, D.W.; Wiesner, G.; Eakin, E.G.; Neuhaus, M.; Owen, N.; Lamontagne, A.D.; Moodie, M.; Winkler, E.A.; Fjeldsoe, B.S.; Lawler, S.; et al. Reducing office workers’ sitting time: Rationale and study design for the Stand Up Victoria cluster randomized trial. BMC Public Health. 2013, 13, 1057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gao, L.; Nguyen, P.; Dunstan, D.; Moodie, M. Are Office-Based Workplace Interventions Designed to Reduce Sitting Time Cost-Effective Primary Prevention Measures for Cardiovascular Disease? A Systematic Review and Modelled Economic Evaluation. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Aronsson, G.; Gustafsson, K. Sickness presenteeism: Prevalence, attendance-pressure factors, and an outline of a model for research. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2005, 47, 958–966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ERS Research and Consultancy. Health at Work Economic Evidence Report. 2016. Available online: https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/publications/health-at-work/health-at-work---economic-evidence-report (accessed on 18 November 2017).
- Edwardson, C.L.; Yates, T.; Biddle, S.J.H.; Davies, M.J.; Dunstan, D.W.; Esliger, D.W.; Gray, L.J.; Jackson, B.; E O’Connell, S.; Waheed, G.; et al. Effectiveness of the Stand More AT (SMArT) Work intervention: Cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2018, 363, k3870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- O’Connell, S.E.; Jackson, B.R.; Edwardson, C.L.; Yates, T.; Biddle, S.J.H.; Davies, M.J.; Dunstan, D.; Esliger, D.; Gray, L.; Miller, P.; et al. Providing NHS staff with height-adjustable workstationsand behaviour change strategies to reduce workplace sitting time: Protocol for the Stand More AT (SMArT) Work cluster randomised controlled trial. BMC Public Health 2015, 15, 1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Reilly, M.C.; Zbrozek, A.S.; Dukes, E.M. The Validity and Reproducibility of a Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Instrument. Pharmacoeconomics 1993, 4, 353–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gao, L.; Flego, A.; Dunstan, D.W.; Winkler, E.A.; Healy, G.N.; Eakin, E.G.; Willenberg, L.; Owen, N.; Lamontagne, A.D.; Lal, A.; et al. Economic evaluation of a randomized controlled trial of an intervention to reduce office workers’ sitting time: The "Stand Up Victoria" trial. Scand. J. Work. Environ. Health. 2018, 44, 503–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Item | Unit Cost | Quantity | Total Cost |
---|---|---|---|
Desks a | |||
Varidesk 36 Pro Plus | £301.50 | 38 | £11,457 |
Varidesk 40 Plus | £352.50 | 7 | £2467.50 |
Varidesk installation | £12.50 | 45 | £562.50 |
Electric desk | £453.71 | 30 | £13,611.30 |
Removal of old desk | £18.50 | 30 | £555 |
Electric desk installation | £7.50 | 30 | £225 |
Sub-Total | £28,878.30 | ||
ActivPAL feedback b | |||
Report production | £4.55 | 255 | £1160.25 |
DARMA a | £169 | 75 | £12,675 |
Information support b | |||
Design and delivery of Seminars | £22.75 c | 8 | £182 |
Printing of posters/leaflets/diaries | £6.99 | 75 | £524.25 |
Researcher demonstration of desk use | £0.91 | 75 | £68 |
Coaching | £15.16 | 75 | £1,138 |
Sub-Total | £1912.25 | ||
TOTAL | |||
Per participant | £44,625.80 | ||
75 | £595 |
Intervention Element | Time/cost to participant | Workloss Costing over 12m (@ mean hourly rate £16.02) |
---|---|---|
Desks set-up and demonstration | Varidesk: 10 min to set up (n = 45) Electric desk: 30 min to remove old desk and set up new desk (n = 30) | Assume 15 mins one-off workloss = £4.00 |
Seminar | Approx. 45 min of their workday to attend a one off seminar on site | Assume 45mins one-off workloss = £12.02 |
activPAL feedback reading and reading initial leaflet Self-monitoring sitting via DARMA cushion (per unit) Gola setting diaries | activPAL and leaflet total time per participant is 15 min Utilising DARMA feedback and diaries a total time of 5 min per week per participant | Workloss (50*5mins + 15min = 265mins) = £70.71 |
Coaching sessions | Brief 10 min with researcher to discuss progress, motivations, goals and plans every 3 months = a total of 40 min over a 12-month period per participant | Assume 40mins one-off workloss = £10.67 |
TOTAL | Intervention cohort (n = 75) Per participant | £7305 £97.40 |
Metrics | Change from Baseline | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
hrs | £’s | |||
Productivity change | Intervention | n | 65 | |
Mean non-zero | 2.41 | £62.83 | ||
Mean (95% CI) | 1.75 (gain) (0.09 to 3.42) | £33.72 (gain) (£60.87 to -£6.58) | ||
Control | n | 52 | ||
Mean non-zero | -1.07 | -£35.21 | ||
Mean (95% CI) | -0.44 (loss) (-2.09 to 1.21) | -£17.68 (loss) (-£50.44 to £15.08) | ||
Delta (I-C) | Mean (95%CI) | 2.19 (-0.16 to 4.55) | £51.41 (£9.68 to £93.13) | |
Adjusted difference a | Mean (95% CI) | 1.58 (-0.50 to 3.67) | £47.36 (£6.50 to £88.22) | |
p-value | 0.137 | 0.023 | ||
Sickness Absence | Intervention | n | 66 | |
Mean non-zero | 3.65 | £46.52 | ||
Mean (95%CI) | 0.28 (-0.43 to 0.99) | £5.42 (-£3.76 to £14.61) | ||
Control | n | 52 | ||
Mean non-zero | 7.67 | £64.86 | ||
Mean (95%CI) | 0.23 (-0.77 to 1.22) | £3.33 (-£8.46 to £15.13) | ||
Delta (I-C) | Mean (95% CI) | 0.05 (-1.12 to 1.23) | £2.09 (-£12.47 to £16.64) | |
Adjusted difference a | Mean (95% CI) | 0.07 (-1.27 to 1.41) | £3.82 (-£13.41 to £21.04) | |
p-value | 0.918 | 0.664 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Munir, F.; Miller, P.; Biddle, S.J.H.; Davies, M.J.; Dunstan, D.W.; Esliger, D.W.; Gray, L.J.; O’Connell, S.E.; Waheed, G.; Yates, T.; et al. A Cost and Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Stand More AT Work (SMArT Work) Intervention. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1214. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041214
Munir F, Miller P, Biddle SJH, Davies MJ, Dunstan DW, Esliger DW, Gray LJ, O’Connell SE, Waheed G, Yates T, et al. A Cost and Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Stand More AT Work (SMArT Work) Intervention. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(4):1214. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041214
Chicago/Turabian StyleMunir, Fehmidah, Paul Miller, Stuart J.H. Biddle, Melanie J. Davies, David W. Dunstan, Dale W. Esliger, Laura J. Gray, Sophie E. O’Connell, Ghazala Waheed, Thomas Yates, and et al. 2020. "A Cost and Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Stand More AT Work (SMArT Work) Intervention" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 4: 1214. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041214