Shephard R J
Prev Med. 1983 Sep;12(5):644-53. doi: 10.1016/0091-7435(83)90220-7.
Health care and health promotion measures currently are undergoing critical cost/benefit or cost/effectiveness scrutiny. An employee fitness program offers a convenient means for realizing community goals of lifestyle change but also has the potential to augment worker productivity. The costs of exercise testing and program development for an employee program ($100-$350 per participant year, measured in 1982 U.S. dollars) compare favorably with nonoccupational approaches to the promotion of fitness and a healthy lifestyle. The combined savings from a reduction of appraised age, improvement in lifestyle, decreased use of hospital and physician services, decrease in absenteeism and employee turnover, improved productivity, and decreased need for geriatric care substantially exceed the likely outlay. Given a 20% participation rate, the order of benefit from these factors is over $700 per year for each member of the labor force. In a company employing 1,000 people, a cost of perhaps $40,000 for 200 participants would yield a dividend of $650-$700,000 per year. Arguments continue on the specificity of exercise-induced gains in health and performance, but the burden of proof rests with those who maintain that equal benefits could be obtained from other tactics.
目前，医疗保健和健康促进措施正在接受严格的成本效益或成本效果审查。员工健身计划为实现生活方式改变的社区目标提供了一种便捷途径，同时也有可能提高员工的生产力。员工计划的运动测试和项目开发成本（以1982年美元计算，每位参与者每年100 - 350美元）与促进健身和健康生活方式的非职业方法相比具有优势。因评估年龄降低、生活方式改善、医院和医生服务使用减少、旷工和员工流动率降低、生产力提高以及老年护理需求减少而带来的综合节省，大大超过了可能的支出。假设参与率为20%，这些因素带来的收益约为劳动力中每位成员每年700多美元。在一家拥有1000名员工的公司中，200名参与者的成本可能为40000美元，每年将产生650000 - 700000美元的收益。关于运动对健康和表现所带来的提升的特异性，争论仍在继续，但举证责任在于那些认为通过其他策略也能获得同等益处的人。
