Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK.
Diabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, LE5 4PW, UK.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Nov 11;19(22):14861. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192214861.
Sedentary behaviours continue to increase and are associated with heightened risks of morbidity and mortality. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of SMART Work & Life (SWAL), an intervention designed to reduce sitting time inside and outside of work, both with (SWAL-desk) and without (SWAL-only) a height-adjustable workstation compared to usual practice (control) for UK office workers. Health outcomes were assessed in quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and costs in pound sterling (2019-2020). Discounted costs and QALYs were estimated using regression methods with multiply imputed data from the SMART Work & Life trial. Absenteeism, productivity and wellbeing measures were also evaluated. The average cost of SWAL-desk was £228.31 and SWAL-only £80.59 per office worker. Within the trial, SWAL-only was more effective and costly compared to control (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER): £12,091 per QALY) while SWAL-desk was dominated (least effective and most costly). However, over a lifetime horizon, both SWAL-only and SWAL-desk were more effective and more costly than control. Comparing SWAL-only to control generated an ICER of £4985 per QALY. SWAL-desk was more effective and costly than SWAL-only, generating an ICER of £13,378 per QALY. Findings were sensitive to various worker, intervention, and extrapolation-related factors. Based on a lifetime horizon, SWAL interventions appear cost-effective for office-workers conditional on worker characteristics, intervention cost and longer-term maintenance in sitting time reductions.
久坐行为持续增加,并与发病率和死亡率的升高相关。我们评估了 SMART Work & Life(SWAL)的成本效益,该干预措施旨在减少工作内外的久坐时间,包括带有(SWAL-desk)和不带有(SWAL-only)可调节高度工作站的干预措施,与常规做法(对照组)相比,用于英国上班族。健康结果以质量调整生命年(QALY)评估,成本以英镑(2019-2020 年)计。使用 SMART Work & Life 试验中多重插补数据的回归方法估计了贴现成本和 QALYs。还评估了旷工、生产力和幸福感指标。SWAL-desk 的平均成本为每位上班族 228.31 英镑,SWAL-only 为 80.59 英镑。在试验中,与对照组相比,SWAL-only 更有效且成本更高(增量成本效益比(ICER):每 QALY 12091 英镑),而 SWAL-desk 则处于劣势(效果最差且成本最高)。然而,在终身范围内,SWAL-only 和 SWAL-desk 都比对照组更有效且成本更高。将 SWAL-only 与对照组进行比较,每 QALY 的 ICER 为 4985 英镑。SWAL-desk 比 SWAL-only 更有效且成本更高,每 QALY 的 ICER 为 13378 英镑。研究结果对各种工人、干预和外推相关因素敏感。基于终身范围,如果考虑工人特征、干预成本和久坐时间减少的长期维持,SWAL 干预措施对上班族来说具有成本效益。