Productivity cost calculations in health economic evaluations: Correcting for compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects

The Economic Burden of Biological Drugs in Rheumatoid Arthritis Treatment

OBJECTIVES

This article aimed to count and compare treatment's direct (only biological drugs) and indirect (loss of productivity) costs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis from 2019 to 2021.

METHODS

The friction cost approach was used to establish indirect costs. Elasticity factor values and friction period for the Slovak Republic from 2019 to 2021 were determined. Direct drug costs were calculated based on average prices from 2019 to 2021 and the number of dispensed medication packages.

RESULTS

The average productivity loss reached €2984.54 in 2019, €3338.46 in 2020, and €3154.01 in 2021. Total indirect costs include productivity loss and sick pay, and from 2019 to 2021 came the values of €8.4 million, €10.1 million, and €8.1 million, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Indirect costs were almost 2.5 to 3 times lower than the biological and targeted treatment costs.

A novel set of Austrian reference unit costs for comprehensive societal perspectives consistent with latest European costing methods for economic evaluations

Decision making in public health often happens against the background of scarce resources. The systematic use of economic evaluations can be a main enabler in the alignment of public health goals with budgetary constraints. However, the lack of standardized methodology in terms of costing method and perspective are a critical barrier to the implementation of economic evaluations and the international comparability of results. We present a novel set of 22 reference unit costs (RUCs) optimized for cross-sectoral economic evaluations in Austria suitable for international comparability calculated using the standardized PECUNIA RUC Template. The common framework for costing and reporting, as well as the easy availability of the RUCs will reduce the burden on researchers and policy makers in future economic evaluations. The higher quality, accuracy, transparency and availability of economic evidence for policy design will help to improve the efficiency of public health-relevant healthcare decisions and make it easier for policy makers to bring funding arrangements and decision making across multiple sectors in line with Health-in-All-Policies goals.

Productivity Loss Across Socioeconomic Groups Among Patients With Low Back Pain or Osteoarthritis: Estimates Using the Friction-Cost Approach in Norway

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to estimate the productivity loss (PL) among patients with low back pain (LBP) or osteoarthritis (OA) across socioeconomic groups, using the friction-cost approach (FCA).

METHODS

A total of 175,550 patients aged 18-65 years were included at their first diagnosis in specialty care between 2011 and 2016. PL was calculated for the year following diagnosis using individual wages, while adjusting for the friction length at 78 days per episode, a team production multiplier at 1.6, compensation mechanisms of 26.8%, and a chain-of-vacancies multiplier at 3.95. We included a simpler FCA model, omitting the latter three parameters, and a human capital approach (HCA) model. Socioeconomic stratifications were created based on education and income. One-way sensitivity analysis was used to assess the influence of the parameters in the full FCA model.

RESULTS

The overall mean number of absent days was 23, while it was 25.3 and 20.1 for those with low and high education levels. The per-patient friction costs were €4395 among all patients and when extending the friction length to 98 days costs were €4342. For those with low and high education levels, the costs were €3671 and €4464, respectively. The costs in the simple FCA and HCA models were €1539 and €2088.

DISCUSSION

Socioeconomic status and model design are sources of variation in PL. In health economic applications with PL and in patient populations with large socioeconomic differences, adjusting for these factors may be as important as sensitivities in parameters such as the friction length.

The Societal Impact of Inclisiran in England: Evidence From a Population Health Approach

OBJECTIVES

As first-in-class cholesterol-lowering small interfering ribonucleic acid, inclisiran provides effective reductions in low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol to achieve better cardiovascular (CV) health. We estimate the health and socioeconomic effects of introducing inclisiran according to a population health agreement in England.

METHODS

Building on the inclisiran cost-effectiveness model, a Markov model simulates health gains in terms of avoided CV events and CV deaths because of add-on inclisiran treatment for patients aged 50 years and older with pre-existing atherosclerotic CV disease. These are translated into socioeconomic effects, defined as societal impact. To that end, we quantify avoided productivity losses in terms of paid and unpaid work productivity and monetize them according to gross value added. Furthermore, we calculate value chain effects for paid work activities, drawing on value-added multipliers based on input-output tables. The derived value-invest ratio compares avoided productivity losses against the increased healthcare costs.

RESULTS

Our results show that 138 647 CV events could be avoided over a period of 10 years. The resulting societal impact amounts to £8.17 billion, whereas additional healthcare costs are estimated at £7.94 billion. This translates into a value-invest ratio of 1.03.

CONCLUSIONS

Our estimates demonstrate the potential health and socioeconomic value of inclisiran. Thereby, we highlight the importance to treat CVD and illustrate the impact that a large-scale intervention can have on population health and the economy.

Production Losses due to Absenteeism and Presenteeism: The Influence of Compensation Mechanisms and Multiplier Effects

BACKGROUND

Productivity costs can form a large and influential component of total costs in an economic evaluation taking a societal perspective. In calculating productivity costs, estimating productivity losses is a central element. Compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects may influence these losses but remain understudied. Compensation mechanisms could reduce productivity losses while multiplier effects may increase them.

METHODS

Data on productivity losses were collected in 2015 using an online survey among a sample of persons aged 15-65 years in The Netherlands who worked at least 12 h per week and reported to have experienced absenteeism and/or presenteeism during the past 4 weeks. A total of 877 respondents completed the survey that contained questions on productivity losses, compensation mechanisms, and multiplier effects.

RESULTS

We found that 45.5% of the respondents reported absenteeism (average 6.5 days) during the past 4 weeks, losing on average 48.7 working hours, while presenteeism was experienced by 75.9% of respondents, with an average loss of 10.7 working hours. Compensation mechanisms were reported by 76.9% of respondents, compensating almost 80% of their lost production, while multiplier effects were reported by 23.6% of respondents, reducing the productivity of 4.2 colleagues by 27.8% on average, implying a multiplier of 2.1 in that subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights that compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects are common and may substantially affect production losses. Investigating these mechanisms and effects further, as well as their interactions, remains important. Translating these findings into productivity cost calculations in economic evaluations is not straightforward and requires attention, especially since compensation mechanisms may not be costless and, for multiplier effects, the value of hours of colleagues may not be similar to that of the person experiencing health problems.

Multiplier Effects and Compensation Mechanisms for Inclusion in Health Economic Evaluation: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects may affect productivity losses due to illness, disability, or premature death of individuals. Hence, they are important in estimating productivity losses and productivity costs in the context of economic evaluations of health interventions. This paper presents a systematic literature review of papers focusing on compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects, as well as whether and how they are included in health economic evaluations.

METHODS

The systematic literature search was performed covering EconLit and PubMed. A data-extraction form was developed focusing on compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects.

RESULTS

A total of 26 studies were included. Of these, 15 were empirical studies, three studies were methodological studies, two studies combined methodological research with empirical research, four were critical reviews, one study was a critical review combined with methodological research, and one study was a cost-benefit analysis. No uniform definition of compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects was identified. The terminology used to describe compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects varied as well. While the included studies suggest that both multipliers as well as compensation mechanisms substantially impact productivity cost estimates, the available evidence is scarce. Moreover, the generalizability as well as validity of assumptions underlying the calculations are unclear. Available measurement methods for compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects differ in approaches and are hardly validated.

CONCLUSION

While our review suggests that compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects may have a significant impact on productivity losses and costs, much remains unclear about their features, valid measurement, and correct valuation. This hampers their current inclusion in economic evaluation, and therefore, more research into both phenomena remains warranted.

The Economic Impact of Extensor Tendon Lacerations of the Hand in the United States

PURPOSE

Extensor tendon lacerations (ETLs) are a common and debilitating injury for thousands of Americans annually. No study has attempted to estimate their economic impact. The objective of this study was to estimate the economic impact of ETLs in America.

METHODS

The cost of ETLs to society was estimated using a validated prevalence-based cost of illness model. The primary cohort was defined as all patients with complete ETLs in the United States undergoing surgical repair and, secondarily, the imputed number of patients requiring reoperation within 1 year. For these groups, both direct and indirect costs (lost income, missed workdays, and disability payments) were measured.

RESULTS

The total annual direct medical costs amounted to $14,095.28 per injury and 100,000 population. The total annual indirect labor costs were found to range between $80,842.90 and $150,136.82 per injury and 100,000 population. Hence, the estimated total costs of ETLs are $307 million per year in the United States alone and could be as high as $531 million annually depending on the effects of worker absenteeism on the core production-based industries.

CONCLUSIONS

Extensor tendon lacerations incur a significant economic burden to our health care system and are more costly when compared with many other common hand conditions. Specifically, indirect costs are the major contributor toward the total cost these injuries incur on society, accounting for an upward of 91% of the total cost. These results suggest efforts be focused on improving rehabilitation protocols and treatments.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II-economic and decision analyses.

Employer survey to estimate the productivity friction period

OBJECTIVES

The friction cost approach (FCA) is one way to estimate lost productivity, which considers the time taken to replace an employee, known as the friction period. The friction period may be influenced by local labour market conditions, limiting the relevance of international FCA estimates. The objective was to estimate the time and costs of replacing an employee in Australia.

METHODS

Staff responsible for recruitment in businesses across Australia were surveyed about the last management and non-management employee hired, workforce composition, friction period time and costs, and team dynamic effects. Primary analyses were conducted on respondents that recruited in the past 12 months. The friction period was decomposed into three periods: recruitment decision, recruitment period, and training period. Descriptive statistics of the friction period time and costs, and team dynamic effects were calculated.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of Australian businesses (N = 274), primarily micro-organisations (2-4 employees, 44%) in urban locations (75%). The time (12.3 weeks; SD 15.1) and costs ($6230; SD $17,502) to replace a manager were higher than those to replace non-managers (10.0 weeks, SD 13.01; $2666, sd $7849). The training period represented the longest time component in replacing an employee (38-40% of the total friction period). There was an increasing impact on other employees' productivity, particularly for absent managers as time off work increased.

CONCLUSIONS

The friction period in Australia was similar to international estimates. Interestingly, the friction period mainly consisted of time outside the recruitment period; the decision to recruit and the training period.

The societal impact of a biologic treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a case study based on secukinumab

Aim: This study estimates the societal benefits of using biologics like secukinumab (SEC) instead of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for treating patients with ankylosing spondylitis in Germany. Materials & methods: A Markov and a population model were used to predict the functional impairment of German ankylosing spondylitis patients using SEC or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. This was translated into avoided productivity losses, which were valued according to gross value added. Results: The productivity impairment of SEC users was predicted to decrease by 20 percentage points, corresponding to 12.8 and 32.7 million hours in paid and unpaid work and a monetary value of €1.6 billion from 2016 to 2030. Accounting for economic spillover effects increases the societal value to € 3.3 billion. Conclusion: The improvements in functional impairment due to biologics could lead to sizable productivity effects.

Occupational Stress and Its Economic Cost in Hong Kong: The Role of Positive Emotions

There has been less research on the costs of occupational stress attributed to certain job stressors in Chinese contexts. This study identified and validated common job stressors and estimated the economic cost in Hong Kong. The role of positive emotions in alleviating the economic costs of job stressors was also examined. Both qualitative and quantitative approaches were adopted. The findings obtained from five focus group discussions and a survey validated five common job stressors: Job insecurity; quantitative workload; organizational constraints; interpersonal conflicts; and work/home interface. A total of 2511 employees were surveyed, with 2032 valid questionnaires returned (925 males, 1104 females, and 3 unidentified, whose ages ranged from 18 to 70 years). The economic costs were estimated by combining the costs of absenteeism, presenteeism, and medical expenses. Absenteeism mainly caused by job stressors of the work/home interface, job insecurity, and quantitative workload accounted for an annual economic cost of HK$550 million to HK$860 million. The annual economic cost due to presenteeism mainly caused by job stressors of job insecurity, interpersonal conflict, quantitative workload, and organizational constraints ranged from HK$1.373 billion to HK$2.146 billion. The cost of medical treatments associated with occupational stress was HK$2.889 billion to HK$4.083 billion. Therefore, the total annual economic cost of occupational stress was approximately HK$4.81 billion to HK$7.09 billion. Positive emotions, representing a less explored individual factor in the cost of occupational stress studies, was found to be negatively correlated with presenteeism and buffered the negative impact of job stressors on absenteeism. The theoretical contributions and practical implications of findings are discussed.

Advances in the methodological approach to friction period estimation: A European perspective

The friction cost approach (FCA) estimates the productivity costs of disease from an employer's perspective but the lack of estimates of friction periods in different countries limits its use. Our aim was to use labour market aggregates to generate two alternative estimates of the friction period for European countries and to apply the FCA to illustrate the impact on cancer-related lost productivity costs. We included thirty countries (EU 27 + the United Kingdom, Switzerland and Norway). Base-case Method 1BC used annual Dutch vacancy stock and flow data (2001-2019) to estimate friction periods for this country. A regression model was employed using Dutch data and country-specific vacancy and unemployment rates to generate country-specific friction period estimates for the other 29 countries. Alternative Method 2ALT used country-specific newly occupied jobs as a proxy vacancy flow variable and vacancy stock data to generate friction period estimates. These were applied, within the FCA, to premature cancer mortality data (from GLOBOCAN2018) for all cancers combined for Western European countries. Costs are in €2018. Method 1BC estimated friction periods in 2018 ranged from 70.8 days for Greece to 145.9 days for the Czech Republic, with a mean duration of 95.3 days. Method 2ALT produced a mean friction period of 80.0 days. On average, across countries, Method 2ALT friction periods were 15.4 days (-18.5%) shorter than Method 1BC estimates. Friction period estimates over the last decade were shorter than those for 2018 reflecting lower vacancy rates. Total cancer premature mortality costs according to FCA Method 1BC amounted to €1.0 billion in 2018 for Western Europe compared to €0.99 billion for Method 2ALT. We developed two alternative - and viable - methods to estimate country-specific friction periods. These approaches will enable researchers to apply the FCA to estimate the productivity cost of diseases across Europe from an employer's perspective.

The Economic Impact of Flexor Tendon Lacerations of the Hand in the United States

PURPOSE

Flexor tendon lacerations are a common and debilitating injury for thousands of Americans annually. Despite this, no study has attempted to estimate the economic impact of these injuries. The objective of this study was to estimate the economic impact of flexor tendon lacerations in America.

METHODS

The cost of flexor tendon lacerations to society was estimated using a validated prevalence-based cost of illness model. The primary cohort was defined as all patients in the United States presenting with complete flexor tendon lacerations who underwent surgical repair. The secondary cohort was defined by all patients who required reoperation within 1 year of their initial operation. For these groups, both direct and indirect costs (lost income, missed workdays, and disability payments) were measured.

RESULTS

Flexor tendon lacerations incur an estimated cost of between US $240.8 and US $409.1 million annually to the American medical system. The total direct cost per injury is estimated to be US $13,725, whereas estimates to the indirect costs range from US $60,786 to US $112,888.

CONCLUSIONS

Flexor tendon lacerations represent an important economic burden to our health care system, even when compared with other common hand conditions. Specifically, indirect costs, such as missed workdays, are the major contributor toward the total cost these injuries incur on society, accounting for upward of 89% of the total cost. This suggests that we should focus our efforts to improve treatments and rehabilitation protocols which decrease these indirect costs.

A Preliminary Attempt at the Identification and Financial Estimation of the Negative Health Effects of Urban and Industrial Air Pollution Based on the Agglomeration of Gdańsk

This article marks the first attempt on Polish and European scale to identify the relationship between urban and industrial air pollution and the health conditions of urban populations, while also estimating the financial burden of incidence rates among urban populations for diseases selected in the course of this study as having a causal relation with such incidence. This paper presents the findings of a pilot study based on general regression models, intended to explore air pollutants with a statistically relevant impact on the incidence of selected diseases within the Agglomeration of Gdańsk in the years 2010–2018. In discussing the city’s industrial functions, the study takes into consideration the existence within its limits of a large port that services thousands of ships every year, contributing substantially to the volume of emissions (mainly NOx and PM) to the air. The causes considered include the impact of air pollution, seasonality, land- and sea-based emissions, as well as their mutual interactions. All of the factors and their interactions have a significant impact (p ≤ 0.05) on the incidence of selected diseases in the long term (9 years). The source data were obtained from the Polish National Health Fund (NFZ), the Agency for Regional Monitoring of Atmosphere in the Agglomeration of Gdańsk (ARMAAG), the Chief Inspectorate of Environmental Protection (GIOŚ), and the Port of Gdańsk Harbourmaster. The study used 60 variables representing the diseases, classified into 19 groups. The resulting findings were used to formulate a methodology for estimating the financial burden of the negative health effects of air pollution for the agglomeration, and will be utilized as a reference point for further research in selected regions of Poland.

Variation in the methodological approach to productivity cost valuation: the case of prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Standardised integration of productivity costs into health economic evaluations is hindered by equity and distributional concerns. Our aim was to explore the distributive impact of productivity cost methodological variation, describing the consequences for different groups.

METHODS

527 prostate cancer survivors (2-5 years post-diagnosis) completed questions on work patterns since diagnosis. Productivity loss, categorised into temporary/permanent absenteeism, reduced hours and presenteeism, were costed in €2012. Valuation approaches included the human capital approach (HCA) and the friction cost approach (FCA), with wage multipliers (WM) applied in additional analyses. Both national and self-reported wages were used. Costs were compared across socio-demographic and economic characteristics using non-parametric tests.

RESULTS

The estimated base case (HCA, using national wages) total productivity cost was €44,201 per prostate cancer survivor. Permanent absenteeism accounted for the largest cost (€18,537), followed by reduced work hours (€11,130), presenteeism (€8148) and temporary absenteeism (€6386). Alternative valuation estimates ranged from - 90% (FCA_{national wage}: €4625) to + 82% (HCAWM_{self-reported wage}: €80,485) compared to the base case and were consistently higher for self-reported wages compared to national wages. Statistically significant differences in productivity cost were found across four of the six survivor socio-demographic and economic characteristics by valuation approach, despite no significant difference in their physical unit equivalents.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that the distributional impact of productivity costs varies by socio-economic and demographic characteristics. We advocate that: productivity loss should be reported in physical units where possible; cost estimation should be subject to sensitivity analysis, and only where this is not feasible, that the HCA and national wages be used to value productivity loss where equity concerns are paramount.

Burden of suicide in Poland in 2012: how could it be measured and how big is it?

OBJECTIVES

The aim of our study was to estimate the health-related and economic burden of suicide in Poland in 2012 and to demonstrate the effects of using different assumptions on the disease burden estimation.

METHODS

Years of life lost (YLL) were calculated by multiplying the number of deaths by the remaining life expectancy. Local expected YLL (LEYLL) and standard expected YLL (SEYLL) were computed using Polish life expectancy tables and WHO standards, respectively. In the base case analysis LEYLL and SEYLL were computed with 3.5 and 0% discount rates, respectively, and no age-weighting. Premature mortality costs were calculated using a human capital approach, with discounting at 5%, and are reported in Polish zloty (PLN) (1 euro = 4.3 PLN). The impact of applying different assumptions on base-case estimates was tested in sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

The total LEYLLs and SEYLLs due to suicide were 109,338 and 279,425, respectively, with 88% attributable to male deaths. The cost of male premature mortality (2,808,854,532 PLN) was substantially higher than for females (177,852,804 PLN). Discounting and age-weighting have a large effect on the base case estimates of LEYLLs. The greatest impact on the estimates of suicide-related premature mortality costs was due to the value of the discount rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide quantitative evidence on the burden of suicide. In our opinion each of the demonstrated methods brings something valuable to the evaluation of the impact of suicide on a given population, but LEYLLs and premature mortality costs estimated according to national guidelines have the potential to be useful for local public health policymakers.

The Estimation and Inclusion of Presenteeism Costs in Applied Economic Evaluation: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Given the significant costs of reduced productivity (presenteeism) in comparison to absenteeism, and overall societal costs, presenteeism has a potentially important role to play in economic evaluations. However, these costs are often excluded. The objective of this study is to review applied cost of illness studies and economic evaluations to identify valuation methods used for, and impact of including presenteeism costs in practice.

METHODS

A structured systematic review was carried out to explore (i) the extent to which presenteeism has been applied in cost of illness studies and economic evaluations and (ii) the overall impact of including presenteeism on overall costs and outcomes. Potential articles were identified by searching Medline, PsycINFO and NHS EED databases. A standard template was developed and used to extract information from economic evaluations and cost of illness studies incorporating presenteeism costs.

RESULTS

A total of 28 studies were included in the systematic review which also demonstrated that presenteeism costs are rarely included in full economic evaluations. Estimation and monetisation methods differed between the instruments. The impact of disease on presenteeism whilst in paid work is high.

CONCLUSIONS

The potential impact of presenteeism costs needs to be highlighted and greater consideration should be given to including these in economic evaluations and cost of illness studies. The importance of including presenteeism costs when conducting economic evaluation from a societal perspective should be emphasised in national economic guidelines and more methodological work is required to improve the practical application of presenteeism instruments to generate productivity cost estimates.

The impact of firms' adjustments on the indirect cost of illness

Illness-related absenteeism reduces firms' output, an effect referred to as indirect cost (IC) and often included in cost-of-illness or cost-effectiveness (of health technologies) studies. The companies may foresee this effect and modify hiring or contracting policies. We present a model allowing the estimation of IC with such adjustments. We show that the risk of illness does not change the general shape and properties of the (expected) marginal productivity function. We apply our model to several illustrative examples and show that firm's adjustments impact IC in an ambiguous way, depending on detailed company/market characteristics: in some cases the company reduces the employment (further increasing IC), in another-the opposite happens. Contrary to previous findings, teamwork and shortfall penalties may reduce IC in some settings. Our analysis highlights that IC should be split into the result of companies preparing for and actually experiencing sick leaves.

Absenteeism and Employer Costs Associated With Chronic Diseases and Health Risk Factors in the US Workforce

INTRODUCTION

Employers may incur costs related to absenteeism among employees who have chronic diseases or unhealthy behaviors. We examined the association between employee absenteeism and 5 conditions: 3 risk factors (smoking, physical inactivity, and obesity) and 2 chronic diseases (hypertension and diabetes).

METHODS

We identified 5 chronic diseases or risk factors from 2 data sources: MarketScan Health Risk Assessment and the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). Absenteeism was measured as the number of workdays missed because of sickness or injury. We used zero-inflated Poisson regression to estimate excess absenteeism as the difference in the number of days missed from work by those who reported having a risk factor or chronic disease and those who did not. Covariates included demographics (eg, age, education, sex) and employment variables (eg, industry, union membership). We quantified absenteeism costs in 2011 and adjusted them to reflect growth in employment costs to 2015 dollars. Finally, we estimated absenteeism costs for a hypothetical small employer (100 employees) and a hypothetical large employer (1,000 employees).

RESULTS

Absenteeism estimates ranged from 1 to 2 days per individual per year depending on the risk factor or chronic disease. Except for the physical inactivity and obesity estimates, disease- and risk-factor-specific estimates were similar in MEPS and MarketScan. Absenteeism increased with the number of risk factors or diseases reported. Nationally, each risk factor or disease was associated with annual absenteeism costs greater than $2 billion. Absenteeism costs ranged from $16 to $81 (small employer) and $17 to $286 (large employer) per employee per year.

CONCLUSION

Absenteeism costs associated with chronic diseases and health risk factors can be substantial. Employers may incur these costs through lower productivity, and employees could incur costs through lower wages.

Longterm Work Productivity Costs Due to Absenteeism and Permanent Work Disability in Patients with Early Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Nationwide Register Study of 7831 Patients

Objective.

To estimate the development and potential disproportional distribution of longterm productivity costs (PC) and their determinants leading to work absenteeism and permanent work disability in working-aged patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods.

A cohort of subjects with early RA was created by identifying the new cases of RA from the national drug reimbursement register that had been granted a special reimbursement for their antirheumatic medications for RA from 2000–2007. The dataset was enriched by cross-linking with other national registries detailing work absenteeism days and permanent disability pensions. In the base case, the human capital approach was applied to estimate PC based on subjects’ annual number of absenteeism days and incomes. Hurdle regression analysis was applied to study the determinants of PC.

Results.

Among the 7831 subjects with early RA, the mean (bootstrapped 95% CI) annual PC per person-observation year was €4800 (4547–5070). The annual PC declined after the first year of RA diagnosis, but increased significantly in subsequent years. In addition, the PC was heavily disproportionally concentrated in a small fraction of patients with RA, because only around 20% of patients accounted for the majority of total annual PC. The initiation of active drug treatment during the first 3 months after RA diagnosis significantly reduced the cumulative PC when compared with no drug treatment.

Conclusion.

The longterm PC increased significantly in parallel with years elapsing after RA diagnosis. Further, the majority of these PC are incurred by a small proportion of patients.

Impact of etanercept tapering on work productivity in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: results from the PRIZE study

Objective

To assess changes in work productivity in patients who have achieved response using etanercept (ETN) 50 mg+methotrexate (MTX) (phase I) are randomised to ETN 25 mg+MTX versus MTX versus placebo (phase II) and then withdrawn from treatment (phase III).

Methods

Patients included in the analysis were in employment entering phase II of the PRIZE trial and had one or more follow-ups. Phase II was a 39-week, randomised and double-blind comparison of the 3 dose-reduction treatments. Phase III was a 26-week observational study where treatment was withdrawn. The Valuation of Lost Productivity was completed approximately every 13 weeks to estimate productivity impacts from a societal perspective.

Results

A total of 120 participants were included in our analyses. During phase II, ETN25+MTX or MTX improved paid work productivity by over 100 hours compared with placebo, amounting to a gain of €1752 or €1503, respectively. ETN25+MTX compared with placebo gains €1862 in total paid/unpaid productivity. At week 52, the 3-month paid work productivity loss was 21.8, 12.8 and 14.0 hours, respectively. The productivity loss increased at week 64 from week 52, dropped at week 76 for all treatment groups and then continued rising after week 76 for the placebo group (71.9 hours at week 91) but not for the other 2 groups (21.9 hours for ETX25+MTX and 27.6 hours for MTX).

Conclusions

The work productivity gain in phase I as a result of ETN50+MTX was marginally lost in the dose-reduction treatment groups, ETN25+MTX and MTX, but substantially lost in the placebo group during phase II.

Trial registration number

NCT00913458; Results.

Estimating productivity costs using the friction cost approach in practice: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The choice of the most appropriate approach to valuing productivity loss has received much debate in the literature. The friction cost approach has been proposed as a more appropriate alternative to the human capital approach when valuing productivity loss, although its application remains limited. This study reviews application of the friction cost approach in health economic studies and examines how its use varies in practice across different country settings.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to identify economic evaluation studies that have estimated productivity costs using the friction cost approach and published in English from 1996 to 2013. A standard template was developed and used to extract information from studies meeting the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

The search yielded 46 studies from 12 countries. Of these, 28 were from the Netherlands. Thirty-five studies reported the length of friction period used, with only 16 stating explicitly the source of the friction period. Nine studies reported the elasticity correction factor used. The reported friction cost approach methods used to derive productivity costs varied in quality across studies from different countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Few health economic studies have estimated productivity costs using the friction cost approach. The estimation and reporting of productivity costs using this method appears to differ in quality by country. The review reveals gaps and lack of clarity in reporting of methods for friction cost evaluation. Generating reporting guidelines and country-specific parameters for the friction cost approach is recommended if increased application and accuracy of the method is to be realized.

Illness related wage and productivity losses: Valuing 'presenteeism'

One source of productivity loss due to illness is the reduced "quantity" or "quality" of labor input while working, often referred to as presenteeism. Illness-related presenteeism has been found to be potentially more costly than absenteeism. To value presenteeism, existing methods use wages as a proxy for marginal productivity at the firm level. However, wage may not equal marginal productivity in some scenarios. One instance is when a job involves team production and perfect substitutes for workers are not readily available. Using a Canadian linked employer-employee survey (2001-2005), we test whether relative wage equals relative marginal productivity among team workers and non-team workers with different frequencies of presenteeism (reduction at work due to illness). For the pooled cross-sectional estimates (2001, 2003, 2005) we obtain 13,755 observations with 6842 unique workplaces. There are 6490 observations for the first differences estimates from the odd years and 5263 observations for the first differences estimates from 2001 to 2002 and 2003 to 2004. We find that in both small and large firms, team workers with frequent reductions at work are less productive but earn similarly compared with non-team workers without reductions. We also find that in small firms, workers with occasional work reductions are more productive than workers without reductions, but the reverse is true in large firms. The study findings partially support the literature stating that productivity loss resulting from employee presenteeism could exceed wages if team work is involved.

The iMTA Productivity Cost Questionnaire: A Standardized Instrument for Measuring and Valuing Health-Related Productivity Losses

BACKGROUND

Productivity losses often contribute significantly to the total costs in economic evaluations adopting a societal perspective. Currently, no consensus exists on the measurement and valuation of productivity losses.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to develop a standardized instrument for measuring and valuing productivity losses.

METHODS

A group of researchers with extensive experience in measuring and valuing productivity losses designed an instrument suitable for self-completion, building on preknowledge and evidence on validity. The instrument was designed to cover all domains of productivity losses, thus allowing quantification and valuation of all productivity losses. A feasibility study was performed to check the questionnaire's consistency and intelligibility.

RESULTS

The iMTA Productivity Cost Questionnaire (iPCQ) includes three modules measuring productivity losses of paid work due to 1) absenteeism and 2) presenteeism and productivity losses related to 3) unpaid work. Questions for measuring absenteeism and presenteeism were derived from existing validated questionnaires. Because validated measures of losses of unpaid work are scarce, the questions of this module were newly developed. To enhance the instrument's feasibility, simple language was used. The feasibility study included 195 respondents (response rate 80%) older than 18 years. Seven percent (n = 13) identified problems while filling in the iPCQ, including problems with the questionnaire's instructions and routing (n = 6) and wording (n = 2). Five respondents experienced difficulties in estimating the time that would be needed for other people to make up for lost unpaid work.

CONCLUSIONS

Most modules of the iPCQ are based on validated questions derived from previously available instruments. The instrument is understandable for most of the general public.

Estimating the monetary value of the annual productivity gained in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis receiving etanercept plus methotrexate: interim results from the PRIZE study

Objective

To measure and value the impact of combined etanercept (ETN) and methotrexate (MTX) therapy on work productivity in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over 52 weeks.

Methods

MTX- and biological-naïve patients with RA (symptom onset ≤12 months; Disease Activity Score based on a 28-joint count (DAS28) >3.2) received open-label ETN50/MTX for 52 weeks. The Valuation of Lost Productivity (VOLP) questionnaire, measuring paid and unpaid work productivity impacts, was completed approximately every 13 weeks. Bootstrapping methods were used to test changes in VOLP outcomes over time. One-year productivity impacts were compared between responders (DAS28 ≤3.2) at week 13 and non-responders using zero-inflated models for time loss and two-part models for total costs of lost productivity.

Results

196 patients were employed at baseline and had ≥1 follow-up with VOLP. Compared with baseline, at week 52, patients gained 33.4 h per 3 months in paid work and 4.2 h per week in unpaid work. Total monetary productivity gains were €1322 per 3 months. Over the 1-year period, responders gained paid (231 h) and unpaid work loss (122 h) compared with non-responders, which amounted to a gain of €3670 for responders.

Conclusions

This is the first clinical trial to measure and value the impact of biological treatment on all the labour input components that affect overall productivity. Combination therapy with ETN50/MTX was associated with a significant productivity gain for patients with early RA who were still observed at week 52. Over the 1-year treatment period, responders at week 13 suffered significantly less productivity loss than non-responders suggesting this gain was related to treatment response.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00913458

Work productivity loss from depression: evidence from an employer survey

BACKGROUND

National working groups identify the need for return on investment research conducted from the purchaser perspective; however, the field has not developed standardized methods for measuring the basic components of return on investment, including costing out the value of work productivity loss due to illness. Recent literature is divided on whether the most commonly used method underestimates or overestimates this loss. The goal of this manuscript is to characterize between and within variation in the cost of work productivity loss from illness estimated by the most commonly used method and its two refinements.

METHODS

One senior health benefit specialist from each of 325 companies employing 100+ workers completed a cross-sectional survey describing their company size, industry and policies/practices regarding work loss which allowed the research team to derive the variables needed to estimate work productivity loss from illness using three methods. Compensation estimates were derived by multiplying lost work hours from presenteeism and absenteeism by wage/fringe. Disruption correction adjusted this estimate to account for co-worker disruption, while friction correction accounted for labor substitution. The analysis compared bootstrapped means and medians between and within these three methods.

RESULTS

The average company realized an annual $617 (SD = $75) per capita loss from depression by compensation methods and a $649 (SD = $78) loss by disruption correction, compared to a $316 (SD = $58) loss by friction correction (p < .0001). Agreement across estimates was 0.92 (95% CI 0.90, 0.93).

CONCLUSION

Although the methods identify similar companies with high costs from lost productivity, friction correction reduces the size of compensation estimates of productivity loss by one half. In analyzing the potential consequences of method selection for the dissemination of interventions to employers, intervention developers are encouraged to include friction methods in their estimate of the economic value of interventions designed to improve absenteeism and presenteeism. Business leaders in industries where labor substitution is common are encouraged to seek friction corrected estimates of return on investment. Health policy analysts are encouraged to target the dissemination of productivity enhancing interventions to employers with high losses rather than all employers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01013220.

Methodological developments in randomized controlled trial-based economic evaluations

Economic evaluation is a key contributor to decision making in health care, and it is important that it is carried out as effectively and reliably as possible. Studies carried out alongside randomised controlled trials are required to contribute real-world evidence to the decision-making process. However, the requirement that resource use be measured as well as effectiveness data within a trial results in additional complexity for trialists, and there are a number of methodological areas in which improvement is needed. This article reviews the literature in methodological work carried out to inform economic evaluation studies conducted alongside randomised controlled trials. Recent advances in areas including overall trial design, measuring resource use, measuring outcomes and reporting economic evaluations are discussed.

How to estimate productivity costs in economic evaluations

Productivity costs are frequently omitted from economic evaluations, despite their often strong impact on cost-effectiveness outcomes. This neglect may be partly explained by the lack of standardization regarding the methodology of estimating productivity costs. This paper aims to contribute to standardization of productivity cost methodology by offering practical guidance on how to estimate productivity costs in economic evaluations. The paper discusses the identification, measurement and valuation of productivity losses. It is recommended to include not only productivity losses related to absenteeism from and reduced productivity at paid work, but also those related to unpaid work. Hence, it is recommended to use a measurement instrument including questions about both paid and unpaid productivity, such as the iMTA Productivity Cost Questionnaire (iPCQ) or the Valuation of Lost Productivity (VOLP). We indicate how to apply the friction cost and the human capital approach and give practical guidance on deriving final cost estimates.

Productivity costs in economic evaluations: past, present, future

Productivity costs occur when the productivity of individuals is affected by illness, treatment, disability or premature death. The objective of this paper was to review past and current developments related to the inclusion, identification, measurement and valuation of productivity costs in economic evaluations. The main debates in the theory and practice of economic evaluations of health technologies described in this review have centred on the questions of whether and how to include productivity costs, especially productivity costs related to paid work. The past few decades have seen important progress in this area. There are important sources of productivity costs other than absenteeism (e.g. presenteeism and multiplier effects in co-workers), but their exact influence on costs remains unclear. Different measurement instruments have been developed over the years, but which instrument provides the most accurate estimates has not been established. Several valuation approaches have been proposed. While empirical research suggests that productivity costs are best included in the cost side of the cost-effectiveness ratio, the jury is still out regarding whether the human capital approach or the friction cost approach is the most appropriate valuation method to do so. Despite the progress and the substantial amount of scientific research, a consensus has not been reached on either the inclusion of productivity costs in economic evaluations or the methods used to produce productivity cost estimates. Such a lack of consensus has likely contributed to ignoring productivity costs in actual economic evaluations and is reflected in variations in national health economic guidelines. Further research is needed to lessen the controversy regarding the estimation of health-related productivity costs. More standardization would increase the comparability and credibility of economic evaluations taking a societal perspective.