You are here
Research & Evidence
Workplace health promotion programs have the potential to significantly improve population health by leveraging the workplace as a setting for health improvement and risk reduction.
Structuring Legal, Ethical, And Practical Workplace Health Incentives: A Reply to Horwitz, Kelly, And DiNardo
Health Affairs | Blog
Hannon, Peggy A., PhD, MPH; Jeffrey R. Harris, MD. "Interventions to Improve Cancer Screening Opportunities in the Workplace." American Journal of Preventive Medicine, July 2008.
All of the latest cancer screening intervention recommendations from the Community Guide can be implemented in the workplace via four important avenues: health insurance beneﬁts, workplace policies, workplace programs, and workplace communications. Health insurance affects workers’ access to and use of preventive care, including cancer screening. Workplace policies also can improve employees’ access to cancer screening. Workplace programs offer workers relatively easy access to and social support for cancer screening. Workplace communications can improve knowledge and shape beliefs, attitudes, and perceived norms about cancer screening, and about the health insurance beneﬁts, policies, and programs aimed at improving screening.
"MAKING THE BUSINESS CASE: How Engaging Employees in Preventive Care Can Reduce Healthcare Costs." C-Change, Spring 2008.
C-Change’s ―Making the Business Case initiative documents why employers should consider including scientifically proven cancer prevention and early detection services in their respective employee health insurance policies. Research has shown that prevention and early detection services, such as tobaccofree policies, tobacco cessation, as well as regular screenings, are proven methods of decreasing cancer risk among employees and increasing early diagnosis and associated medical care outcomes. The data also suggest that these cancer prevention and early detection services are effectively decreasing direct and indirect costs associated with cancer.
Fitch, Kate, RN, MEd; Kosuke Iwasaki, FIAJ, MAAA; Bruce Pyenson, FSA, MAAA. "Covering Smoking Cessation as a Health Benefit." Milliman: Consultants and Actuaries, December 6, 2006.
This report provides information so employers can make informed choices based on the costs and benefits of smoking cessation programs – and compare these to other routinely provided benefits.
Bruce Pyenson, FSA, MAAA, and Patricia A. Zenner, RN. "Cancer Screening: Payer Cost/Benefit thru Employee Benefits Programs." Milliman: Consultants and Actuaries, November 18, 2005.
This paper demonstrates that covering and promoting full compliance with established screening recommendations thru employer sponsored programs is low cost and cost effective for employee benefit programs.
Fitch, Kate, RN MEd; Kosuke Iwakaki, FIAJ, MAAA; Bruce Pyneson, FSA, MAAA. "Covering Smoking Cessation as a Health Benefit: A Case for Employers ." Milliman: Consultants and Actuaries, August 1, 2005.
Smoking is about choices. An individual can choose to try once again to quit, or an employer can choose to help those individuals quit by funding smoking cessation programs. This report provides information so employers can make informed choices based on the costs and benefits of smoking cessation programs – and compare these to other routinely provided benefits.
"A National Action Plan for Cancer Survivorship: Advancing Public Health Strategies ." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, April 2004.
Cancer is the second leading cause of death among adults in the United States and affects an estimated 1 in 3 individuals in their lifetime, either through their own diagnosis or that of a loved one (ACS, 2003). Increasing innovations in medical technology have led to earlier diagnoses and improved treatment of many cancers, resulting in more people diagnosed with cancer surviving each year. Currently, approximately 62% of cancer survivors are expected to live at least 5 years after diagnosis (ACS, 2003). As of January 2000, there were approximately 9.6 million cancer survivors in the United States (NCI, 2003a). This estimate includes people diagnosed with cancer but does not include others affected by a diagnosis, such as family members and friends.
Fichtenberg, Caroline M.; Stanton A Glantz. "Effect of smokefree workplaces on smoking behaviour: systematic review." British Medical Journal, March 21, 2002.
Passive smoking is linked with cancer, heart disease, respiratory illness and is the leading source of indoor airpollution. In the United States, passive smoking has been linked to the deaths of at least 53 000 non-smokers each year, about one non-smoker for each eight smokers that tobacco kills.
We investigated the effects of smoke-free workplaces on cigarette consumption and compared these effects with those obtained by raising taxes.
Arnold Barnett, PhD; Howard Birnbaum, PhD; Pierre-Yves Cremieux, PhD; A. Mark Fendrick, MD; and Mitchell Slavin, PharmD. "The Costs of Cancer to a Major Employer in the United States: A Case-Control Analysis." The American Journal of Managed Care, November 2000.
Reliable data on the costs and outcomes of different healthcare interventions are essential for efficient distribution of healthcare resources and evaluation of quality of healthcare.The National Institutes of Health estimates total annual costs for cancer in the United States at $107 billion annually. These cancer costs represented roughly 5% of all healthcare expenditures in 1995. These high healthcare costs translate into significantexpenses for US employers. As cancer treatment improves and the number of patients in remission or recovery increases, the management of cancer care is becoming increasingly important. This trend has led managed care organizations to focus on assessing the likely costs of cancer care and outcomes for different types of cancer.