How to Estimate Productivity Costs in Economic Evaluations

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 335-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marieke Krol ◽  
Werner Brouwer
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Productivity Costs

scholarly journals CONCEPTUALIZATIONS OF THE SOCIETAL PERSPECTIVE WITHIN ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruben M.W.A. Drost ◽  
Ingeborg M. van der Putten ◽  
Dirk Ruwaard ◽  
Silvia M.A.A. Evers ◽  
Aggie T.G. Paulus
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Informal Care ◽  
Societal Perspective ◽  
Healthcare Sector ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Productivity Costs ◽  
Informal Care Costs ◽  
Care Costs ◽  
The Way

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate how the societal perspective is conceptualized in economic evaluations and to assess how intersectoral costs and benefits (ICBs), that is, the costs and benefits pertaining to sectors outside the healthcare sector, impact their results.Methods: Based on a search in July 2015 using PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and PsychINFO, a systematic literature review was performed for economic evaluations which were conducted from a societal perspective. Conceptualizations were assessed in NVivo version 11 using conventional and directed content analysis. Trial-based evaluations in the fields of musculoskeletal and mental disorders were analyzed further, focusing on the way ICBs impact the results of economic evaluations.Results: A total of 107 studies were assessed, of which 74 (69.1 percent) provided conceptualizations of the societal perspective. These varied in types of costs included and in descriptions of cost bearers. Labor productivity costs were included in seventy-two studies (67.3 percent), while only thirty-eight studies (35.5 percent) included other ICBs, most of which entailed informal care and/or social care costs. ICBs within the educational and criminal justice sectors were each included five times. Most of the trial-based evaluations analyzed further (n = 21 of 28) reported productivity costs. In nine, these took up more than 50 percent of total costs. In several studies, criminal justice and informal care costs were also important.Conclusions: There is great variety in the way the societal perspective is conceptualized and interpreted within economic evaluations. Use of the term “societal perspective” is often related to including merely productivity costs, while other ICBs could be relevant as well.

scholarly journals In Absence of Absenteeism: Some Thoughts on Productivity Costs in Economic Evaluations in a Post-corona Era

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Werner Brouwer ◽  
Samare Huls ◽  
Ayesha Sajjad ◽  
Tim Kanters ◽  
Leona Hakkaart-van Roijen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Productivity Costs

scholarly journals A noticeable difference? Productivity costs related to paid and unpaid work in economic evaluations on expensive drugs

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 391-402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marieke Krol ◽  
Jocé Papenburg ◽  
Siok Swan Tan ◽  
Werner Brouwer ◽  
Leona Hakkaart
Keyword(s):  
Unpaid Work ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Productivity Costs ◽  
Paid And Unpaid Work

Correcting for compensating mechanisms related to productivity costs in economic evaluations of health care programmes

2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 435-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karin H. M. Jacob-Tacken ◽  
Marc A. Koopmanschap ◽  
Willem Jan Meerding ◽  
Johan L. Severens
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Productivity Costs

scholarly journals Adjusted productivity costs of stroke by human capital and friction cost methods: a Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966 study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ina Rissanen ◽  
Leena Ala-Mursula ◽  
Iiro Nerg ◽  
Marko Korhonen
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Birth Cohort ◽  
Unemployment Rate ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Occupational Class ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Productivity Cost ◽  
Cost Estimates ◽  
Productivity Costs ◽  
Friction Cost

Abstract Background Productivity costs result from loss of paid and unpaid work and replacements due to morbidity and mortality. They are usually assessed in health economic evaluations with human capital method (HCM) or friction cost method (FCM). The methodology for estimating lost productivity is an area of considerable debate. Objective To compare traditional and adjusted HCM and FCM productivity cost estimates among young stroke patients. Methods The Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966 was followed until the age of 50 to identify all 339 stroke patients whose productivity costs were estimated with traditional, occupation-specific and adjusted HCM and FCM models by using detailed, national register-based data on care, disability, mortality, education, taxation and labour market. Results Compared to traditional HCM, taking into account occupational class, national unemployment rate, disability-free life expectancy and decline in work ability, the productivity cost estimate decreased by a third, from €255,960 to €166,050. When traditional FCM was adjusted for occupational class and national unemployment rate, the estimate more than doubled from €3,040 to €7,020. HCM was more sensitive to adjustments for discount rate and wage growth rate than FCM. Conclusions This study highlights the importance of adjustments of HCM and FCM. Routine register-based data can be used for accurate productivity cost estimates of health shocks.

Productivity Costs in Economic Evaluations: Past, Present, Future

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (7) ◽  
pp. 537-549 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marieke Krol ◽  
Werner Brouwer ◽  
Frans Rutten
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Productivity Costs

Productivity, cost, efficacy and cost effectiveness of motor-manual, mechanical, and herbicide release of boreal spruce plantations

1997 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Wayne Bell ◽  
Kevin R. Ride ◽  
Michel L. St-Amour ◽  
Mark Ryans
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Vegetation Indices ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Percent Cover ◽  
Forest Environment ◽  
Northern Ontario ◽  
Productivity Cost ◽  
Productivity Costs ◽  
Reforestation Program ◽  
One Year

Although the release of spruce plantations with herbicides is an important part of Ontario's reforestation program, the people of Ontario do not support the use of any pesticides in the forest environment. Of the available alternatives, those most feasible for conifer release in northern Ontario appear to be cutting with brush saws and using mechanized cleaning machines. In this study, a component of the Fallingsnow Ecosystem Project, we quantified the relative productivity, costs, treatment efficacy and cost effectiveness of: 1) motor-manual cutting (brush saws), 2) mechanical brush cutting (Silvana Selective/Ford Versatile), 3) helicopter application of Release® (a.i. triclopyr) herbicide, and 4) helicopter application of Vision® (a.i. glyphosate herbicide and compared these to control (untreated) plots. Productivity (productive machine hours ha−1) was lowest for brush saws, followed by Silvana Selective and highest for helicopter operations. Treatment and super-vision costs ($ ha−1) were highest for Silvana Selective, followed by brush saw, Release®, and lowest for Vision®. One year post-treatment, vegetation indices (percent cover × mean height) for non-conifer woody plants decreased in the Vision®, Silvana Selective, Release®, and brush saw treatments respectively and increased on control plots. Vegetation indices for herbaceous plants were lowest for Vision®, followed by brush saw, Silvana Selective, control and highest for Release® plots. The average cost effectiveness ratio was lowest for Vision®, followed by Release®, Silvana Selective, and highest for brush saws. As empirical data from the project becomes available, longer-term economic evaluations will be made. Key words: clearing saws, cleaning, conifer release, cost effectiveness, Fallingsnow Ecosystem Project, glyphosate, herbicides, machine evaluation, productivity, Release®, Silvana Selective, triclopyr, forest vegetation management, Vision®

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document