Modeling the Impact of Enhanced Depression Treatment on Workplace Functioning and Costs
A Cost–Benefit Approach
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9104930 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Anthony T Lo Sasso (University of Illinois Chicago), Kathryn Rost (University of Colorado Health), Arne Beck (0000-0002-5304-9794, Kaiser Permanente) |
| Year | 2006 |
| Volume | 44 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 352-358 |
| Publication date | 2006-04-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Medical Care (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0025-7079 • E-ISSN: 1537-1948 |
| Publisher | Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1097/01.mlr.0000204049.30620.1e |
| PMID | 16565636 |
| OpenAlex | W2033740151 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 6 |
| References cited | 25 |
BACKGROUND: The impact of depression on the workplace has been widely observed in studies examining absenteeism and reduced productivity during days at work. However, there is little scientific evidence about whether depression interventions are cost-beneficial to employers. OBJECTIVE: We construct a cost-benefit analysis of depression treatment under different workplace assumptions better reflecting the nature of employment. RESEARCH DESIGN: Data from a randomized controlled trial in which employed primary care patients with depression were treated in practices randomly assigned to an enhanced treatment intervention or usual care were used to construct a cost-benefit model from an employer perspective under different assumptions regarding employment. SUBJECTS: A national sample of 198 workers employed in a range of positions by companies was studied. MEASURES: Benefits included self-reported productivity and absenteeism; costs included intervention and treatment costs. Net benefit was calculated under different scenarios and return on investment (ROI) is derived. RESULTS: Enhanced depression treatment resulted in an average net benefit to the employer of Dollars 30 per participating worker in Year 1 of the intervention and Dollars 257 per participating worker in Year 2, for an estimated ROI during the 2-year period of 302%. ROI increased in firms that rely on team production, hire more costly substitute labor, or realize penalties for output shortfalls. ROI decreased in firms that have a large fraction of employees with dependent coverage and experience high turnover rates. Results also are sensitive to how subjectively reported productivity is valued. CONCLUSION: Many employers will receive a potentially significant ROI from depression treatment models that improve absenteeism and productivity at work
Absenteeism · Business · Cost–benefit analysis · Depression (economics) · Economics · Intervention (counseling) · Physical therapy · Production (economics) · Productivity · Psychological intervention · Randomized controlled trial · Return on investment · Sick leave · Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout · Medicine · Mental Health Treatment and Access · Nursing · Psychology · Social Psychology · Workplace Health and Well-being
How Income and Income Inequality Drive Depressive Symptoms in U.S. Adults, Does Sex Matter
Contextualising the Effectiveness of an Employee Assistance Program Intervention on Psychological Health
Mental Illness as a Risk Factor for Uninsurance Among Mothers of Infants
Identifying the Mechanisms for Workplace Burden of Psychiatric Illness
Response to an Article in the April 2006 Issue of Medical Care
Response to Letter From Dr Raj Persaud
Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine
The World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ)
Cost of Lost Productive Work Time Among US Workers With Depression
Impact of Disseminating Quality Improvement Programs for Depression in Managed Primary Care
Forecasting coronary heart disease incidence, mortality, and cost
The Work Limitations Questionnaire
Relationship of Employee-Reported Work Limitations to Work Productivity
The Effect of Improving Primary Care Depression Management on Employee Absenteeism and Productivity
| Unique citing works | 6 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,3 |
| Citation span | 2006 - 2022 (17) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 5 |