A Review of Health-Related Workplace Productivity Loss Instruments
Jennifer H. Lofland
Kevin D. Frick
The objective of this review was to identify health-related workplace productivity loss survey instruments, with particular emphasis on those that capture a metric suitable for direct translation into a monetary figure. A literature search using Medline, HealthSTAR, PsycINFO and Econlit databases between 1966 and 2002, and a telephone-administered survey of business leaders and researchers, were conducted to identify health-related workplace productivity measurement survey instruments. This review was conducted from the societal perspective. Each identified instrument was reviewed for the following: (i) reliability; (ii) content validity; (iii) construct validity; (iv) criterion validity; (v) productivity metric(s); (vi) instrument scoring technique; (vii) suitability for direct translation into a monetary figure; (viii) number of items; (ix) mode(s) of administration; and (x) disease state(s) in which it had been tested. Reliability and validity testing have been performed for 8 of the 11 identified surveys. Of the 11 instruments identified, six This review provides a comprehensive overview of the published, peer-reviewed survey instruments available to measure health-related workplace productivity loss. As the field of productivity measurement matures, tools may be developed that will allow researchers to accurately calculate lost productivity costs when performing cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses. Using data captured by these instruments, society and healthcare decision makers will be able to make better informed decisions concerning the value of the medications, disease management and health promotion programmes that individuals receive.
In order to set up a list of libraries that you have access to,
you must first login
or sign up.
Then set up a personal list of libraries from your profile page by
clicking on your user name at the top right of any screen.