The Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Productivity Measurement and Enhancement System Intervention to Reduce Employee Work-Related Stress and Enhance Work Performance

Abstract

Background: The study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of the Productivity Measurement and Enhancement System (ProMes) intervention to reduce employee work-related stress and enhance work performance. Methods: A prospective cohort study was used to undertake the evaluation from a business perspective. Objective workload data and stress were gathered repeatedly over a 17-month period (i.e., before and after intervention). Independent t-test and an interrupted time series (ITS) analysis were used in the analysis. The average cost-effectiveness ratio (ACER) was calculated as a ratio of the average cost of the intervention and the effect sizes of the different outcomes to reflect the average cost per clinician for each unit change in outcome. Results: Based on the results of the ITS analysis, an expenditure of EUR 41,487 was linked with no change in stress levels, according to the ACER for stress. In addition, the expenditures associated with each unit change were EUR 3319 for overall tasks per hour worked, EUR 2761 for visits per hour worked, EUR 2880 for administrative tasks, but EUR 9123 for answering phone calls. Conclusions: ProMes is not cost–effective in terms of work-related stress levels, but the intervention seemed to have increased efficiency in some objective work performance measures, albeit at a relatively high extra cost.