Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness and Return-on-Investment of a Mindfulness-Based Worksite Intervention: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
van Dongen, Johanna M; van Berkel, Jantien; Boot, Cécile R L; Bosmans, Judith E; Proper, Karin I; Bongers, Paulien M; van der Beek, Allard J; van Tulder, Maurits W; van Wier, Marieke F.
Afiliación
  • van Dongen JM; Body@Work, Research Center for Physical Activity, Work and Health, TNO-VU University Medical Center (Drs van Dongen, van Berkel, Boot, Proper, Bongers, Beek, van Tulder, van Wier); Department of Health Sciences and the EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, VU University Amsterdam (Drs van Dongen, Bosmans, van Tulder, van Wier); Department of Public and Occupational Health and the EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Cente
J Occup Environ Med ; 58(6): 550-60, 2016 06.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27281638
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness and return-on-investment analysis comparing a mindfulness-based worksite intervention to usual practice.

METHODS:

Two hundred fifty-seven governmental research institute employees were randomized to the intervention or control group. Intervention group participants received an eight-week mindfulness training, e-coaching, and supporting elements. Outcomes included work engagement, general vitality, job satisfaction, work ability, and costs. Cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted from the societal and employer's perspective, and a return-on-investment analysis from the employer's perspective.

RESULTS:

After 12 months, a significant but not clinically relevant adverse effect on work engagement was found (-0.19; 95% confidence interval -0.38 to -0.01). There were no significant differences in job satisfaction, general vitality, work ability, and total costs. Probabilities of cost-effectiveness were low (≤0.25) and the intervention did not have a positive financial return to the employer.

CONCLUSION:

The intervention was neither cost-saving nor cost-effective. Poor e-coaching compliance might partly explain this result.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Análisis Costo-Beneficio / Lugar de Trabajo / Atención Plena / Promoción de la Salud Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Health_economic_evaluation Límite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Región como asunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: J Occup Environ Med Asunto de la revista: MEDICINA OCUPACIONAL / SAUDE AMBIENTAL Año: 2016 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Análisis Costo-Beneficio / Lugar de Trabajo / Atención Plena / Promoción de la Salud Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Health_economic_evaluation Límite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Región como asunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: J Occup Environ Med Asunto de la revista: MEDICINA OCUPACIONAL / SAUDE AMBIENTAL Año: 2016 Tipo del documento: Article