Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
PharmacoEconomics
Published in: PharmacoEconomics 17/2004

01-12-2004 | Original Research Article

Validation of the work and health interview

Authors: Dr Walter F. Stewart, Judith A. Ricci, Carol Leotta, Elsbeth Chee

Published in: PharmacoEconomics | Issue 17/2004

Login to get access

Abstract

Background: Instruments that measure the impact of illness on work do not usually provide a measure that can be directly translated into lost hours or costs. We describe the validation of the Work and Health Interview (WHI), a questionnaire that provides a measure of lost productive time (LPT) from work absence and reduced performance at work.
Method: A sample (n = 67) of inbound phone call agents was recruited for the study. Validity of the WHI was assessed over a 2-week period in reference to workplace data (i.e. absence time, time away from call station and electronic continuous performance) and repeated electronic diary data (n = 48) obtained approximately eight times a day to estimate time not working (i.e. a component of reduced performance).
Results: The mean (median) missed work time estimate for any reason was 11 (8.0) and 12.9 (8.0) hours in a 2-week preiod from the WHI and workplace data, respectively, with a Pearson’s (Spearman’s) correlation of 0.84 (0.76). The diary-based mean (median) estimate of time not working while at work was 3.9 (2.8) hours compared with the WHI estimate of 5.7 (3.2) hours with a Pearson’s (Spearman’s) correlation of 0.19 (0.33). The 2-week estimate of total productive time from the diary was 67.2 hours compared with 67.8 hours from the WHI, with a Pearson’s (Spearman’s) correlation of 0.50 (0.46).
Conclusion: At a population level, the WHI provides an accurate estimate of missed time from work and total productive time when compared with workplace and diary estimates. At an individual level, the WHI measure of total missed time, but not reduced performance time, is moderately accurate.
Footnotes
1
The use of trade names is for product identification purposes only and does not imply endorsement.
 
2
Where punch-time data were used in the derivation of workplace and diary measures, time for lunch and breaks was removed according to the following rules: if the employee’s punch-time was ≥360 minutes on a particular day, 1 hour was deducted for that day for lunch and breaks; if the punch-time was between 210 and 359 minutes, 45 minutes were deducted for lunch and breaks; if the punch-time was between 135 and 209 minutes, 15 minutes were deducted for lunch and breaks; and if the punch-time was <135 minutes, no time was deducted for lunch and breaks.
 
Literature
1.
Berger ML, Murray IF, Xu J, et al. Alternative valuations of work loss and productivity. J Occup Environ Med 2001; 43: 18–24PubMedCrossRef
2.
Berndt-Rauf P, Burton W, McCunney RJ. Health, productivity, and occupational medicine [guest editor’s preface]. J Occup Environ Med 2001; 43: 1CrossRef
3.
Goetzel RZ, Ozminkowski RJ. Health and productivity management: emerging opportunities for health promotion professional for the 21st century. Am J Health Promot 2000; 14: 211–4PubMedCrossRef
4.
Holland J, Holland C, Anstadt G. et al. Impact of the Workplace Environment on Worker Health and Productivity. Scottsdale (AZ): The Institute for Health and Productivity Management, 2001
5.
McCunney RJ. Health and productivity: a role for occupational health professionals. J Occup Environ Med 2001; 43: 30–45PubMedCrossRef
6.
Mill IS. Principles of political economy, with some of their applications to social philosophy. London: John W. Parker, West Strand, 1848
7.
O’Donnell MP. Health and productivity management: the concept, impact, and opportunity: commentary to Goetzel and Ozminkowski. Am J Health Promot 2000; 14: 215–7PubMedCrossRef
8.
Parks S. Improving workplace performance: historical and theoretical contexts. Monthly Labor Review 1995; 118: 18–28
9.
Riedel JE, Baase C. Preventing disease and promoting health: impact on productivity. Scottsdale (AZ): The Institute for Health and Productivity Management, 2001
10.
Riedel JE, Lynch W, Baase C, et al. The effect of disease prevention and health promotion on workplace productivity: a literature review. Am J Health Promot 2001; 15: 167–91PubMedCrossRef
11.
Smith DJ. Absenteeism and “presenteeism” in industry. Arch Environ Health 1970; 21: 670–7PubMed
12.
Smith A. An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. (5th ed., Cannan, E. editor). London: Methuen and Co. Ltd, 1904
13.
Dasbach EJ, Carides GW, Gerth WC, et al. Work and productivity loss in the rizatriptan multiple attack study. Cephalalgia 2000; 20: 830–4PubMedCrossRef
14.
Davies GM, Santanello N, Gerth W, et al. Validation of a migraine work and productivity loss questionnaire for use in migraine studies. Cephalalgia 1999; 19: 497–502PubMedCrossRef
15.
Gerth WC, Carides GW, Dasbach EJ, et al. The multinational impact of migraine symptoms on healthcare utilisation and work loss. Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19 (2): 197–206CrossRef
16.
Hu XH, Markson LE, Lipton RB, et al. Burden of migraine in the United States: disability and economic costs. Arch Intern Med 1999; 159: 813–8PubMedCrossRef
17.
Schulman EA, Cady RK, Henry D, et al. Effectiveness of sumatriptan in reducing productivity loss due to migraine: results of a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial. Mayo Clinic Proc 2000; 75: 782–9CrossRef
18.
Schwartz BS, Stewart WK, Lipton RB. Lost workdays and decreased work effectiveness associated with headache in the workplace. J Occup Environ Med 1997; 39: 320–7PubMedCrossRef
19.
Stang PE, Osterhaus IT. Impact of migraine in the United States: data from the national health interview survey. Headache 1993; 33: 29–35PubMedCrossRef
20.
Stang P, Cady R, Batenhorst A, et al. Workplace productivity: a review of the impact of migraine and its treatment. Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19 (3): 231–44PubMedCrossRef
21.
Stewart WF, Shechter A, Rasmussen BK. Migraine prevalence: a review of population-based studies. Neurology 1994; 44: S17–23PubMed
22.
Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Simon D. Work-related disability: results from the American migraine study. Cephalalgia 1996; 16: 231–8PubMedCrossRef
23.
Von Korff M, Stewart WF, Lipton RB. Assessing headache severity: new directions. Neurology 1994; 44: S40–6
24.
Fautrel B, Guillemin F. Cost of illness studies in rheumatic disease. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2002; 14: 121–6PubMedCrossRef
25.
Greenberg PE, Finkelstein SN, Berndt ER. Calculating the workplace cost of chronic disease. Bus Health 1995; 13: 27–30PubMed
26.
Merkesdal S, Ruof J, Schoffski O, et al. Indirect medical costs in early rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 44: 528–34PubMedCrossRef
27.
Burton WN, Connerty CM. Evaluation of a worksite-based patient education intervention targeted at employees with diabetes mellitus. J Occup Environ Med 1998; 40: 702–6PubMedCrossRef
28.
Ng YC, Jacobs P, Johnson JA. Productivity losses associated with diabetes in the US. Diabetes Care 2001; 24: 257–61PubMedCrossRef
29.
Blaiss MS. Cognitive, social, and economic costs of allergic rhinitis. Allergy Asthma Proc 2000; 21: 7–13PubMedCrossRef
30.
Blanc PD, Trupin L, Eisner L, et al. The work impact of asthma and rhinitis: findings from a population-based survey. J Clin Epidemiol 2001; 54: 610–8PubMedCrossRef
31.
Burton WN, Conti DJ, Chen C-Y, et al. The impact of allergies and allergy treatment on worker productivity. J Occup Environ Med 2001; 43: 64–71PubMedCrossRef
32.
Crystal-Peters J, Crown WH, Goetzel RZ, et al. The cost of productivity losses associated with allergic rhinitis. Am J Manag Care 2000; 6: 373–8PubMed
33.
Kessler RC, Almeida DM, Berglund P, et al. Pollen and mold exposure impairs the work performance of employees with allergic rhinitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2001; 87: 289–95PubMedCrossRef
34.
Slavin RG. Occupational and allergic rhinitis: impact on worker productivity and safety. Allergy Asthma Proc 1998; 19: 277–84PubMedCrossRef
35.
Borchardt PJ. Employee productivity and gastroesophageal reflux disease: the payer’s viewpoint. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96: S62–3PubMedCrossRef
36.
Henke CJ, Levin TR, Henning JM, et al. Work loss costs due to peptic ulcer disease and gastroesophageal reflux disease in a health maintenance organization. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95: 788–92PubMedCrossRef
37.
Wahlqvist P. Symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease, perceived productivity, and health-related quality of life. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96: S57–61PubMedCrossRef
38.
Berndt ER, Bailit HL, Keller MB, et al. Health care use and atwork productivity among employees with mental disorders. Health Aff 2000; 19 (4): 244–56CrossRef
39.
Conti DJ, Burton WN. The economic impact of depression in a workplace. J Occup Med 1994; 36: 983–8PubMed
40.
Greenberg PE, Stiglin LE, Finkelstein SN, et al. The economic burden of depression in 1990. J Clin Psychiatry 1993; 54: 405–18PubMed
41.
Simon GE, Revicki D, Heiligenstein J, et al. Recovery from depression, work productivity, and health care costs among primary care patients. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2000; 22: 153–62PubMedCrossRef
42.
Simon GE, Barber C, Birnbaum HG, et al. Depression and work productivity: the comparative costs of treatment versus nontreatment. J Occup Environ Med 2001; 43: 2–9PubMedCrossRef
43.
Cockburn IM, Bailit HL, Berndt ER, et al. When antihistamines go to work. Bus Health 1999; 17: 49–50PubMed
44.
Cull RE, Wells NEJ, Miocevich ML. The economic cost of migraine. Br J Med Econ 1992; 2: 103–15
45.
Kessler RC, Barber C, Birnbaum HG, et al. Depression in the workplace: effects on short-term disability. Health Aff 1999; 18: 163–71CrossRef
46.
Osterhaus IT, Guterman DL, Piachetka JR. Healthcare resource and lost labour costs of migraine headache in the US. Pharmacoeconomics 1992; 2 (1): 67–76PubMedCrossRef
47.
Stewart WF, Ricci JA, Leotta C. Health-related lost productive time (LPT): recall interval and bias in LPT estimates. J Occup Environ Med 2004; 46: S12–22PubMedCrossRef
48.
Greenberg PE, Birnbaum HG, Kessler RC, et al. Impact of illness and its treatment on workplace costs: regulatory and measurement issues. J Occup Environ Med 2001; 43: 56–63PubMedCrossRef
49.
Johnson WG. Economic analysis of health and productivity: an integrated approach to employee health. Scottsdale (AZ): The Institute for Health and Productivity Management, 2001
50.
Aldana SG, Pronk NP. Health promotion programs, modifiable health risks, and employee absenteeism. J Occup Environ Med 2001; 43: 36–46PubMedCrossRef
51.
Brouwer WBF, Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FFH. Productivity losses without absence: measurement validation and empirical evidence. Health Policy 1999; 48: 13–27PubMedCrossRef
52.
Bunn WB, Pikelny DB, Slavin TJ, et al. Health, safety, and productivity in a manufacturing environment. J Occup Environ Med 2001; 43: 47–55PubMedCrossRef
53.
Koopman C, Pelletier KR, Murray IF, et al. Stanford presenteeism scale: health status and employee productivity. J Occup Environ Med 2002; 44: 14–20PubMedCrossRef
54.
Levey J, Levey M, Adams JD, et al. How workplace culture influences productivity and business success. Scottsdale (AZ): The Institute for Health and Productivity Management, 2001
55.
Peterson KW, Travis JW. Health and productivity management: report summaries from IHPM centers of inquiry. Scottsdale (AZ): The Institute for Health and Productivity Management, 2001
56.
Brouwer WBF, Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FFH. Productivity costs measurement through quality of life? A response to the recommendation of the Washington panel. Health Econ 1997; 6: 253–9PubMedCrossRef
57.
Ungar WJ, Coyte PC. The Pharmacy Medication Monitoring Program Advisory Board. Health Economics 2000; 9: 37–46PubMedCrossRef
58.
Pearson K. On the criterion that a given system of deviations from the probable in the case of a correlated system of variables is such that it can be reasonably supposed to have arisen from random sampling. Philos Mag 1900; 50: 157–75CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Validation of the work and health interview
Authors
Dr Walter F. Stewart
Judith A. Ricci
Carol Leotta
Elsbeth Chee
Publication date
01-12-2004
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
PharmacoEconomics / Issue 17/2004
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200422170-00003

Other articles of this Issue 17/2004

PharmacoEconomics 17/2004 Go to the issue

Current Opinion

Reconciliation of economic concerns and health policy

Review Article

Measurement of health-related QOL in diabetes mellitus

Original Research Article

Cost effectiveness of raloxifene in the treatment of osteoporosis in Sweden

Original Research Article

Relative cost effectiveness of Depo-Provera®, Implanon®, and Mirena® in reversible long-term hormonal contraception in the UK