Are Office-Based Workplace Interventions Designed to Reduce Sitting Time Cost-Effective Primary Prevention Measures for Cardiovascular Disease? A Systematic Review and Modelled Economic Evaluation

Lan Gao, Phuong Nguyen, David Dunstan and Marjory Moodie
Additional contact information
Lan Gao: Deakin Health Economics, Centre for Population Health Research, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3127, Australia
Phuong Nguyen: Deakin Health Economics, Centre for Population Health Research, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3127, Australia
David Dunstan: Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne 3004, Australia
Marjory Moodie: Deakin Health Economics, Centre for Population Health Research, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3127, Australia

IJERPH, 2019, vol. 16, issue 5, 1-17

Abstract: Objectives: To assess the cost-effectiveness of workplace-delivered interventions designed to reduce sitting time as primary prevention measures for cardiovascular disease (CVD) in Australia. Methods: A Markov model was developed to simulate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of a workplace intervention for the primary prevention of CVD amongst office-based workers. An updated systematic review and a meta-analysis of workplace interventions that aim to reduce sitting time was conducted to inform the intervention effect. The primary outcome was workplace standing time. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated for this intervention measured against current practice. Costs (in Australia dollars) and benefits were discounted at 3% annually. Both deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic (PSA) sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: The updated systematic review identified only one new study. Only the multicomponent intervention that included a sit-and-stand workstation showed statistically significant changes in the standing time compared to the control. The intervention was associated with both higher costs ($6820 versus $6524) and benefits (23.28 versus 23.27, quality-adjusted life year, QALYs), generating an ICER of $43,825/QALY. The DSA showed that target age group for the intervention, relative risk of CVD relative to the control and intervention cost were the key determinants of the ICER. The base case results were within the range of the 95% confidence interval and the intervention had a 85.2% probability of being cost-effective. Conclusions: A workplace-delivered intervention in the office-based setting including a sit-and-stand desk component is a cost-effective strategy for the primary prevention of CVD. It offers a new option and location when considering interventions to target the growing CVD burden.

Keywords: sedentary behaviour; workplace intervention; multicomponent; cost-effective analysis; cardiovascular disease; primary prevention (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/5/834/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/5/834/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:5:p:834-:d:211876

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().