Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness and Return-on-Investment of a Mindfulness-Based Worksite Intervention: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

J Occup Environ Med

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 Center, Amsterdam (Drs van Dongen, van Berkel, Boot, Proper, der Beek); TNO Healthy Living, Leiden (Dr Bongers); and Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and the EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands (Drs van Tulder, van Wier).

Published: June 2016

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.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000000736DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cost-effectiveness return-on-investment
8
mindfulness-based worksite
8
worksite intervention
8
return-on-investment analysis
8
work engagement
8
general vitality
8
job satisfaction
8
work ability
8
intervention
6
long-term cost-effectiveness
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!