OBJECTIVE: To develop and apply a model to assess the economic value of a workplace influenza programme from the perspective of the employer. DESIGN: The model calculated the avoided costs of influenza, including treatment costs, lost productivity, lost worker added value and the cost of replacing workers. Subtracted from this benefit were the costs associated with a vaccination programme, including administrative costs, the time to give the vaccine, and lost productivity due to adverse reactions. The framework of the model can be applied to any company to estimate the cost-benefit of an influenza immunisation programme. SETTING: The model developed was applied to 4030 workers in the core divisions of a Brazilian pharma-chemical company. RESULTS: The model determined a net benefit of $US121,441 [129,335 Brazilian reals ($Brz)], or $US35.45 ($Brz37.75) per vaccinated employee (1997 values). The cost-benefit ratio was 1:2.47. The calculations were subjected to a battery of 1-way and 2-way sensitivity analyses that determined that net benefit would be retained as long as the vaccine cost remained below $US45.40 ($Brz48.40) or the vaccine was at least 32.5% effective. Other alterations would retain a net benefit as well, including several combinations of incidence rate and vaccine effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis suggests that providing an influenza vaccination programme can incur a substantial net benefit for an employer, although the size of the benefit will depend upon who normally absorbs the costs of treating influenza and compensating workers for lost work time due to illness, as well as the type of company in which the immunisation programme is applied.
OBJECTIVE: To develop and apply a model to assess the economic value of a workplace influenza programme from the perspective of the employer. DESIGN: The model calculated the avoided costs of influenza, including treatment costs, lost productivity, lost worker added value and the cost of replacing workers. Subtracted from this benefit were the costs associated with a vaccination programme, including administrative costs, the time to give the vaccine, and lost productivity due to adverse reactions. The framework of the model can be applied to any company to estimate the cost-benefit of an influenza immunisation programme. SETTING: The model developed was applied to 4030 workers in the core divisions of a Brazilian pharma-chemical company. RESULTS: The model determined a net benefit of $US121,441 [129,335 Brazilian reals ($Brz)], or $US35.45 ($Brz37.75) per vaccinated employee (1997 values). The cost-benefit ratio was 1:2.47. The calculations were subjected to a battery of 1-way and 2-way sensitivity analyses that determined that net benefit would be retained as long as the vaccine cost remained below $US45.40 ($Brz48.40) or the vaccine was at least 32.5% effective. Other alterations would retain a net benefit as well, including several combinations of incidence rate and vaccine effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis suggests that providing an influenza vaccination programme can incur a substantial net benefit for an employer, although the size of the benefit will depend upon who normally absorbs the costs of treating influenza and compensating workers for lost work time due to illness, as well as the type of company in which the immunisation programme is applied.
Authors: Maarten J Postma; Paul Jansema; Marianne L L van Genugten; Marie-Louise A Heijnen; Johannes C Jager; Lolkje T W de Jong-van den Berg Journal: Drugs Date: 2002 Impact factor: 9.546
Authors: Bruce Y Lee; Rachel R Bailey; Ann E Wiringa; Abena Afriyie; Angela R Wateska; Kenneth J Smith; Richard K Zimmerman Journal: Vaccine Date: 2010-07-08 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Jördis J Ott; Janna Klein Breteler; John S Tam; Raymond C W Hutubessy; Mark Jit; Michiel R de Boer Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2013-05-31 Impact factor: 3.452