Available via license: CC BY
Content may be subject to copyright.
hp://www.phcfm.org Open Access
African Journal of Primary Health Care & Family Medicine
ISSN: (Online) 2071-2936, (Print) 2071-2928
Page 1 of 8 Original Research
Read online:
Scan this QR
code with your
smart phone or
mobile device
to read online.
Authors:
Darcelle D. Schouw1
Robert Mash1
Aliaons:
1Department of Family and
Emergency Medicine, Faculty
of Medicine and Health
Sciences, University of
Stellenbosch, Cape Town,
South Africa
Corresponding author:
Darcelle Schouw,
darcellespeaker@gmail.com
Dates:
Received: 04 Aug. 2019
Accepted: 15 Jan. 2020
Published: 22 June 2020
How to cite this arcle:
Schouw DD, Mash R. Cost
and consequence analysis
of the Healthy Choices at
Work programme to prevent
non-communicable diseases
in a commercial power plant,
South Africa. Afr J Prm Health
Care Fam Med. 2020;12(1),
a2217. hps://doi.
org/10.4102/phcfm.
v12i1.2217
Copyright:
© 2020. The Authors.
Licensee: AOSIS. This work
is licensed under the
Creave Commons
Aribuon License.
Introducon
Non-communicable diseases (NCDs), such as cardiovascular disease, cancer, chronic respiratory
disease and diabetes, were responsible for 70% of global deaths in 2015, with more than three-
quarters of these deaths occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).1,2 Risk factors
for NCDs are greatly interconnected with environmental factors and increased urbanisation.3 In a
study on 23 selected LMICs, chronic NCDs accounted for 50% of the gross burden of disease.4 The
global increase of NCDs is of both epidemiological and economic concerns as they have a
substantial impact on health, health services and organisational productivity.4,5 The World
Economic Forum has identified chronic diseases as one of the most significant threats to global
economic growth and estimated a cumulative loss to the global economy of $7 trillion between
2011 and 2025.5,6
In South Africa (SA), the burden of NCDs contributes to 57% of all deaths and is accompanied
by significant impairments such as amputations, blindness, hemiparesis and speech problems.7
There is a substantial impact on the quality of life of individuals and families.8,9 The impact of
NCDs is predicted to increase further in SA over the next decade.10 In SA, between 2006 and
2015, diabetes, stroke and coronary heart disease caused an estimated loss of $1.88 billion to the
gross domestic product.11 Organisations are impacted by direct and indirect costs of high
absenteeism and staff turnover as these diseases lead to morbidity in the working-age population,
with obese workers costing organisations in the USA 49% more than their non-obese colleagues
in terms of leave with pay.12 The direct costs include sick leave days, medical referrals and costs
Background: The workplace is an ideal setting for the implementation of a health promotion
programmes to prevent non-communicable diseases (NCD). There are limited resources assigned
to workplace health promotion programmes in low-and middle-income countries (LMIC).
Aim: This study aimed to conduct a cost and consequence analysis of the Healthy Choices at
Work programme.
Setting: This study was conducted at a commercial power plant in South Africa.
Methods: Incremental costs were obtained for the activities of the Healthy Choices at Work
programme over a two-year period. A total of 156 employees were evaluated in the intervention,
although the effect was experienced by all employees. An annual health risk factor assessment
at baseline and follow up evaluated the consequences of the programme.
Results: The total incremental costs over the two-year period accumulated to $4015 for 1743
employees. The cost per employee on an annual basis was $1.15 and was associated with a
-10.2mmHg decrease in systolic blood pressure, -3.87mmHg in diastolic blood pressure,
-0.45mmol/l in total cholesterol and significant improvement in harmful alcohol use, fruit and
vegetable intake and physical inactivity ( p < 0.001). There was no correlation between sickness
absenteeism and risk factors for NCDs.
Conclusion: The cost to implement the multicomponent HCW programme was low with
significant beneficial consequences in transforming the workplace environment and reducing
risks factors for NCDs. Findings of this study will be useful for small, medium and large
organisations, the national department of health, and similar settings in LMICs.
Keywords: cost and consequence; incremental costs; risk factors; prevention; NCDs;
workplace; LMIC.
Cost and consequence analysis of the Healthy Choices at
Work programme to prevent non-communicable diseases
in a commercial power plant, South Africa
Read online:
Scan this QR
code with your
smart phone or
mobile device
to read online.
Page 2 of 8 Original Research
hp://www.phcfm.org Open Access
related to replacing absent employees, although indirect
costs include losses from reduced productivity.13 Many of
the deaths caused by NCDs are premature and occur in
people of working age (36–64 years).10
Underlying these diseases are a number of behavioural risk
factors such as tobacco smoking, harmful alcohol use,
physical inactivity and an unhealthy diet.14 Interventions,
therefore to prevent NCDs, focus on reducing harmful alcohol
levels and tobacco smoking as well as improving physical
activity and a healthy diet.5 Lifestyle behaviours are not just a
matter of individual choice and control, but are also influenced
by the environment in which individual decision-making is
embedded.15
The World Health Organization (WHO) has identified the
‘best buys’ for LMICs to prevent and control NCDs.16 A ‘best
buy’ is an intervention that is very cost-effective, feasible and
culturally acceptable and adds on average an additional year
of healthy life.17 According to WHO, the following should be
considered when selecting such interventions: effectiveness,
cost-effectiveness, affordability, capacity to implement,
feasibility according to national circumstances, impact on
health equity and its place within a menu of population-wide
and individual interventions.16 Despite numerous potential
interventions for the prevention and control of NCDs, choices
regarding which interventions should be prioritised are
critical, as resources in most countries are limited.
The SA National Department of Health, in its ‘Strategic Plan
for the Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Diseases
2013–2017’, promulgates a balance between individual-level
and population-based strategies to prevent NCDs. Prevention
and postponement of NCDs are more effective and less costly
than treating those who become ill.18 NCDs in SA pose a
challenge to economic development and there is a need for a
priority-setting agency that assesses cost-effectiveness,
accessibility and feasibility of diverse interventions.19 The
national health budget does not include funding for robust
health and costing data for NCDs to enable planning, budgeting
and evaluation of activities.19
The workplace is an important setting for the prevention and
control of NCDs.20 Workplace health promotion programmes
(WHPPs) adopt a twofold approach that attributes a healthy
lifestyle both to the individual’s responsibility and behaviour
and to the influence of the environment that is outside the
individual’s control.21 Organisations that implement WHPPs
may subscribe to one or both approaches. The WHO’s ‘best
buys’ found no conclusive cost-effectiveness analysis for
interventions in the workplace, but nevertheless made some
recommendations on the basis of the available evidence. These
recommendations include (1) implementing nutrition
education and counselling to increase fruit and vegetable
uptake and (2) implementing multicomponent workplace
physical activity programmes.22 In a systematic review, aligned
to the WHO approach, 89% of LMICs had no studies on
‘best buys’. More than half of the studies reported effectiveness
for group interventions in reducing tobacco, but found weaker
evidence for interventions aimed at individuals. Because most
of the LMICs have not conducted such research, consideration
should be given to evaluate cost-effectiveness of interventions,
while focusing on national priorities and interventions with the
strongest evidence base.23 Recommended interventions for
NCD risk factors in LMICs include making workplaces tobacco
smoke-free with health information and warnings, reducing
salt intake in food and implementing media campaigns on
physical activity.24
There are relatively few studies showing the cost-effectiveness
of WHPPs in Africa. Studies in Africa have shown that the
NCD burden has increased and occurs concurrently with HIV,
with workplace wellness programmes showing promise.19
However, the urban poor and unemployed have little access to
these programmes. The families of the deceased carry the
biggest brunt with two-thirds of poor households having no
insurance for funeral costs and succumb to a loss of income
from the deceased wage earners.25 In the USA, a WHPP with
fire fighters showed a 10% reduction in cardiovascular events,
but with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1.44 million
per event prevented.13 A study evaluating the cost-effectiveness
of a WHPP focusing on healthy eating in Ireland concluded
that an organisational system-level dietary intervention was
more cost-effective than individual education in terms of
improved quality of life and reduced absenteeism.26 In a
review of the economic impact of worksite interventions to
promote healthy diet and physical activity, there was evidence
of a 25% – 30% reduction in absenteeism and medical costs
over 3–4 years.27 However, in a study of 44 UK worksites,
exploring a WHPP designed to reduce physical inactivity, the
intervention was not cost-effective.28
In many countries, including SA, policy focuses on occupational
health and safety rather than on disease prevention in the
workplace, and there is a lack of empirical evidence to support
the cost-effectiveness of WHPPs.29 The literature on WHPPs in
Africa has focused on short-term feasibility or pilot studies.30
Therefore, further research on the cost-effectiveness of
interventions for the prevention of NCDs in the SA workplace
is needed. The aim of this study therefore was to determine the
incremental costs and consequences of the Healthy Choices at
Work (HCW) in terms of improvement in risk factors for NCDs
and sick leave absenteeism.
Methods
Study design
This study was an incremental cost and consequence study of
the HCW programme at a commercial power plant in the
Western Cape, SA.31,32 An incremental cost analysis was
performed for additional costs incurred to the organisation
resulting from the actions of the HCW. This study compared
the incremental costs of implementing the HCW programme
over 2 years with the consequences in terms of changes in
risk factors for NCDs and sick leave.
Page 3 of 8 Original Research
hp://www.phcfm.org Open Access
Seng
This study was conducted at a commercial power plant
within a nature reserve close to Cape Town, SA. The 1743
permanent employees had a wide range of occupations,
which included engineers, plant operators, physicists,
technicians, artisans and support staff working in shifts.
The power plant included a health and wellness department
that conducted routine annual health risk assessments
(HRAs) on self-selected employees and provided occupational
health services. All staff members in the organisation
were entitled to 180 days of sick leave over a 3-year cycle
and were insured for medical care. The on-site health and
wellness department conducted periodic medicals (physical
examination, medical investigation of lung function, hearing,
vision, heat stress and full blood counts on employees). Food
was subsidised and provided by an external company which
was contracted to operate the canteen and vending machines.
The power plant operated in a highly pressurised environment
because of the lack of generation capacity in SA relative to the
increased demand for electricity. Employees worked very
intensively during outages when generation was halted for
routine maintenance.
The Healthy Choices at Work programme
The HCW intervention, which took place over 2 years, was
implemented by participatory action research with a
cooperative inquiry group (CIG) and is more fully described in
a separate publication.33 A diverse CIG made up of 11 key
decision-makers across the organisation (one financial manager,
one wellness manager, one senior occupational health nurse,
three engineering managers, two project management advisors,
one industrial relations manager, one quality control officer
and a manager from the organisation’s training department)
led the intervention. The intervention focused on four key
areas:
1. Catering and the provision of food: A new wellness
meal (a low-fat, low-salt option with additional vegetables
and fruit) was made available to employees on all shifts
at no additional cost to them and was actively promoted
to all workers via in-house daily newsflash articles, work
team sessions and multimedia presentations. Healthy
affordable snacks were also sold at the cafeterias, and
fruit was provided as a healthy snack to employees
working extended shifts.
2. Opportunities for physical activity: Areas were identified
within the surrounding nature reserve for walking,
running and cycling, and functional exercise classes were
held four times a week. First Friday sports took place
once a month and staff members were released from their
duties to participate in 2.5 km/5 km walks, a 10 km run or
a 25 km cycling. Employees were also encouraged to
participate with their families in weekend park runs
within their own communities.
3. Provision of health and wellness services: The HCW
included two annual HRAs during the intervention. The
HRAs provided feedback on NCD risk and the health and
wellness team offered counselling to employees on
behavioural change. Staff at the Health and Wellness
department participated in a 3-day training course on
brief behavioural change counselling using the 5 As (Ask,
Alert, Assess, Assist and Arrange) approach in a guiding
style to assist employees in making healthy lifestyle
decisions.34
4. Managerial buy-in and participation: The management
team consisted of an executive committee with 10–12
senior managers led by a general manager. Managers
approved the prevention programme and led by example
in choosing wellness meals, marketing activities,
participating in physical activities and promoting health
by broadcasting discussions of their own behavioural
change.
Evaluaon of incremental costs
Incremental costs to the organisation that were associated
with implementing the HCW were calculated for the 2-year
period. Incremental costs were defined as additional costs
that were incurred on top of existing expenditure. For
example, allowing employees to participate in first Friday
sports did not alter the cost of salaries and therefore these
costs were not included, although the purchasing of additional
exercise equipment was included. Research-related costs
were excluded.
Activities that led to incremental costs were identified by the
CIG for the four key areas of the intervention (catering,
physical activity, health and wellness and management
support). The information on costs was sourced from the
organisation’s financial system by the finance manager and
entered into an Excel spreadsheet.
These costs are reported in the ‘Results’ section according to
the four main areas of intervention, which were further
analysed in terms of the cost per capita and cost per annum.
Evaluaon of changes in risk factors for non-
communicable diseases
A before-and-after study evaluated the changes in risk factors
for NCDs, and the methods are fully reported elsewhere.35 The
study population was all permanent employees working at
the power plant, and there were no specific exclusion criteria.
A sample of 156 employees was randomly selected. Sample
size calculations confirmed the power of this sample to detect
meaningful changes in risk factors for NCDs over time.36
Participants were assessed at baseline and 24 months by
means of questionnaires, physical measurements and clinical
tests performed by trained health professionals from the
health and wellness department. The questionnaires included
data on demographic information, medical and family
history, medication use, diet, physical activity, alcohol
consumption and psychosocial stress factors. The Global
Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) was used to quantify
Page 4 of 8 Original Research
hp://www.phcfm.org Open Access
levels of physical activity.37 Data on alcohol use were collected
by using the validated Alcohol Use Disorders Identification
Test (AUDIT) questionnaire.38 Questions on tobacco smoking,
fruit and vegetable intake were extracted from the South
African Demographic Health Survey Questionnaire.39
Questions on psychosocial stress at work or at home were
obtained from the organisation’s in-house HRA questionnaire.
Clinical tests included blood pressure, blood glucose and
total cholesterol, with physical measurements of body mass
index, waist-to-hip ratio and a 10-year cardiovascular risk
assessment. Blood pressure was measured by using
standardised procedures for systolic and diastolic blood
pressures.40 Point-of-care testing for random blood glucose
and total cholesterol utilised a finger prick capillary blood
sample.41 Standing height, weight and waist and hip
circumferences were measured and body mass index and
waist-to-hip ratio were calculated.41 A 10-year cardiovascular
risk was assessed for each participant.42
Data were captured in an Excel spreadsheet and checked for
errors or omissions. Data were then analysed using the
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 24.1,
IBM, New York.
Metabolic equivalence of task metabolic equivalence of task
(MET) minutes were calculated from the GPAQ data. A
minimum of 600 MET minutes per week was required to be
considered physically active. The AUDIT questionnaire
included 10 questions with a 4-point Likert scale that gave a
possible total score of 40. Respondents with a score of 7 or less
were categorised as sensible drinkers, those with a score of 8–19
were categorised as potentially harmful drinkers and those with
a score of 20 or more were categorised as potentially dependent
drinkers. Descriptive analysis was used to calculate the mean
and standard deviation or frequency and percentage of all
variables at baseline and follow-up.
Paired t-tests were used to compare the mean differences for
normally distributed numerical data (e.g. blood pressure,
blood glucose, total cholesterol, body mass index, waist
circumference, waist-to-hip ratio [WHR]) from baseline to
follow-up at 2 years. McNemar’s chi-square test was used to
compare paired binary categorical data from before to after
(e.g. psychosocial stress, smoking, fruit and vegetables).
Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
Evaluaon of changes in sick leave
Changes in sick leave related to NCDs were evaluated on the
same sample of 156 employees as described above in the
before-and-after study. Employee data on sick leave were
collected on an annual basis by the Human Resources
Information System. For this study, data were extracted on
the study sample at baseline for the year prior to this study
and at 2-year follow-up for the second year of the study
intervention. Sick leave was measured in the following ways:
• The Gross Sickness Absentee Rate (GSAR) measured
person days lost because of sick leave as a percentage of
the total potential working days. The GSAR is always
expressed as a percentage and is the international
standard used for comparison of sickness absenteeism
between companies, other work forces and countries.43
The ideal GSAR to aim for in SA is between 2% and 5%.44
• The absentee frequency rate (AFR) is the number of
absence incidents per person for a given period and is
calculated as the total number of absence incidents over a
12-month period divided by the number of employees
over a 12-month period. Only the number of incidents
and not the duration is calculated and a favourable AFR
is less than 0.5.44
All data were captured on an Excel spreadsheet and checked
for errors or omissions before analysis using IBM SPSS
software version 25.1. Descriptive analysis was used to
calculate the mean and standard deviation of GSAR and AFR
before and after the intervention. Pearson’s correlation
coefficient (r) test was conducted to investigate the relationship
between GSAR and AFR for systolic blood pressure, diastolic
blood pressure and total cholesterol, assuming that they were
normally distributed. A one-way between-subjects analysis of
variance (ANOVA) was conducted to compare the effect of
fruit and vegetable intake and psychosocial stress on GSAR
and AFR.
Ethical consideraon
Ethics approval was obtained from the Health and Research
Ethics Committee (HREC) of Stellenbosch University
(S15/08/165) and permission was obtained from the power
plant to conduct this study. Written consent was obtained
from each participant of the study.
Results
Incremental costs
Table 1 shows the incremental costs for the four key areas
targeted in the intervention. The total incremental cost to the
company was R59 183, which equated to an average of
R29 591 per annum. The average incremental cost per
employee for implementing the HCW was estimated as
R33.95 ($2.3) over 2 years or R16.98 ($1.15) per annum.
For physical activity, the incremental costs included the costs
of equipment for functional exercise activities (e.g. mats,
balls, skipping ropes) and the first Friday sports (e.g. colour
TABLE 1: Incremental costs for acvies.
Intervenon Cost for acvies,
2016–2017
Rand
Cost for acvies,
2016–2017
US $†
Opportunies for physical acvity 31 583 2143
Catering and the provision of food 11 400 773
Provision of health and wellness services 16 200 1099
Managerial buy-in and parcipaon 0 0
Total 59 183 4015
†, Exchange rate at 11 December 2019 of 1 Rand to US $0.068.
Page 5 of 8 Original Research
hp://www.phcfm.org Open Access
powder). For catering activities, additional fruit was provided
during outages. For health and wellness services the costs
included the training of nine health professionals in brief
behavioural change counselling. There were no incremental
costs for the managers.
Changes in risk factors
The mean age of the participants was 42.7 years (standard
deviation [s.d.] = 9.7) and 64% were male. Table 2 presents the
changes in behavioural and psychosocial risk factors for NCDs
that were associated with the intervention. There were
significant reductions in harmful alcohol use, physical
inactivity and improved fruit and vegetable intake. There was
no change in tobacco smoking. Participants reported
significantly improved relationships with colleagues and self-
perceived health that could possibly be attributed to the
intervention. There were also significant improvements
(Table 3) in mean systolic blood pressure (-10.2 mmHg),
diastolic blood pressure (-3.87 mmHg) and total cholesterol
(-0.45 mmol/L). There was no change in overweight, obesity
or random glucose.
Changes in sick leave
Tables 4 and 5 show the relationship between changes in sick
leave and changes in risk factors. Overall, there was no
meaningful correlation between sick leave and risk factors,
although a decrease in alcohol intake was weakly associated
with an increase in sick leave.
Discussion
The HCW was associated with significant improvements
in risk factors for NCDs that are likely to be clinically
meaningful. This study also suggests that the HCW is a
highly affordable intervention. Significant improvement in
risk factors for NCDs was seen with minimal incremental
costs to the company. The cost to implement the
intervention was approximately $1 per individual per
annum, which is important for LMICs where resources are
constrained. The WHO ‘best buys’ approach defined a
number of criteria to assess interventions, and these are
used to structure the discussion: affordability, capacity to
implement, feasibility according to national circumstances,
impact on health equity and the need to implement a
combination of population-wide policy interventions and
individual interventions.5 The HCW programme has the
potential to be considered a ‘best buy’ when assessed
according to these criteria.
TABLE 2: Change in behavioural and psychosocial risk factors (N = 137).
Risk factors Baseline
%
Follow-up
%
p
Behavioural risk factors
Sensible alcohol drinker (AUDIT score < 8) 78.2 93.5 0.001
Harmful alcohol drinker (AUDIT score 8–19) 21.0 4.8 -
Dependent alcohol drinker (AUDIT score > 20) 0.8 1.6 -
Tobacco smoking 25.0 21.8 0.344
Inadequate fruit and vegetable intake
(< 5 porons/day)
73.2 35.8 ˂ 0.001
Insuciently acve (<600 MET minutes/week) 55.9 34.7 ˂ 0.001
Psychosocial factors
Relaonship with colleagues 21.1 11.3 0.015
Lack of recognion 18.8 18.8 1.000
Lack of resources to do my work 29.5 30.3 1.000
Lack of meaningful work 15.1 13.5 0.664
Relaonship with my supervisor 9.8 12.0 0.664
Lack of clarity concerning work outputs 20.9 15.7 0.265
Personal nances 29.8 18.3 0.008
My health or family member’s health 22.3 10.8 0.006
Relaonship with family and children 16.0 13.7 0.690
Relaonship with my partner or spouse 13.3 9.2 0.210
Emoonal and mental health concerns 8.8 4.7 0.227
I have challenges with addicons 3.3 0.8 0.250
AUDIT, Alcohol Use Disorders Idencaon Test; MET, metabolic equivalence of task.
TABLE 4: Relaonship of sick leave and categorical risk factors.
Risk factors Mean change
in GSAR
s.d. pMean change
in AFR
s.d. p
Change in fruit and vegetable intake
Increase in intake (n = 29) -0.67 2.9 0.017 -0.52 1.9 0.892
No change in intake (n = 55) 0.51 4.4 -0.25 3.0
Decrease in intake (n = 9) -1.0 3.1 -0.56 2.8
Change in perceived personal and family health
Increase in stress (n = 4) 0.95 0.8 0.918 -1.75 2.9 0.087
No change in stress (n = 73) -0.16 4.8 -0.23 2.8
Decrease in stress (n = 16) -0.86 3.4 -0.37 2.3
Change in relaonship with colleagues
Increase in stress (n = 4) -1.99 3.1 0.711 0.50 1.7 0.552
No change in stress (n = 68) -0.10 3.7 -0.03 2.6
Decrease in stress (n = 19) -2.13 7.1 -1.53 3.0
GSAR, gross sickness absentee rate; s.d., standard deviaon; AFR, absentee frequency rate.
TABLE 3: Change in metabolic risk factors (N = 137).
Risk factors Baseline Follow-up Mean of the
dierence
95% CI p
Mean s.d. Mean s.d.
Systolic blood
pressure (mmHg)
131.6 18.5 121.4 14.6 -10.2 -7.3: -13.2 < 0.001
Diastolic blood
pressure (mmHg)
83.4 13.7 79.5 8.8 -3.87 -1.8: -5.8 ˂ 0.001
Total cholesterol
(mmol/L)
5.6 1.1 5.1 1.1 -0.45 -0.3: -0.6 ˂ 0.001
Random glucose
(mmol/L)
5.7 1.5 6.0 2.0 0.31 -0.6: 0.2 0.069
Body mass index
(kg/m2)
29.0 5.5 29.0 5.7 -0.05 -0.4: 0.3 0.760
Waist
circumference (cm)
92.1 14.3 92.2 14.4 0.05 -1.1: 1.0 0.926
Waist-to-hip
rao (cm)
0.86 0.1 0.87 0.1 -0.00 -0.0: 0.0 0.484
s.d., standard deviaon; CI, condence interval.
TABLE 5: Correlaon of sick leave with numerical risk factors.
Correlaon Pearson correlaon (r)p
GSAR vs. systolic blood pressure 0.171 0.096
GSAR vs. diastolic blood pressure -0.102 0.325
GSAR vs. total cholesterol -0.168 0.101
GSAR vs. AUDIT -0.258 0.011
GSAR vs. METS -0.048 0.642
AFR vs. systolic blood pressure -0.087 0.399
AFR vs. diastolic blood pressure -0.160 0.118
AFR vs. total cholesterol -0.154 0.135
AFR vs. AUDIT -0.259 0.011
AFR vs. METS -0.002 0.981
GSAR, gross sickness absentee rate; AUDIT, Alcohol Use Disorders Idencaon Test; METS,
metabolic equivalence of task; AFR, absentee frequency rate.
Page 6 of 8 Original Research
hp://www.phcfm.org Open Access
Aordability
The implementation of HCW was very affordable when
compared with other types of interventions. For example,
using the Internet as a vehicle for health promotion to impact
physical activity as well as fruit and vegetable intake was
more costly ($425 per person) and not effective.45 The cost to
implement a system-level dietary modification intervention
to reduce absenteeism in the workplace was $56 per employee
per annum.26
Programmes such as HCW that focus primarily on
environmental modification rather than education from
health professionals in the workplace are more likely to be
affordable.23 The HCW programme also appears more
affordable than some community-based interventions for
reduction in systolic blood pressure ($62 per person for a 1
mmHg decrease versus $1 per person for a 10 mmHg
decrease), especially as the HCW cost was not limited to an
effect on blood pressure alone.46
Capacity to implement
Sufficient and trained capacity was provided in the form of a
dedicated team of professionals from the organisational
health and wellness department as well as from the
operational sectors in the organisation and CIG. The alcohol
policy and subsidised policy on providing wellness meals
was incorporated in the organisational regulations. Future
capacity can be increased by incorporating a train-the-trainer
programme whereby volunteers within the organisation are
invited as health and wellness champions and trained on
how to implement WHPP. An example of such a programme
is the Work@Health T3 Programme, an evidence-based
curriculum whereby employees and contract staff are trained
in health promotion to train other employees. The Work@
Health programme is effective in that the curriculum can be
adapted to the context and culture of the organisation and
therefore build on the internal capacity to sustain health
promotion in the workplace.47
Feasibility according to naonal circumstances
This study shows the feasibility of utilising currently
available resources to relieve the burden of NCDs amongst
employees. However, the HCW relied on significant indirect
costs (extended time given off for participation in sport,
staff within the organisation rendering the necessary
services, clinical testing, media and advertising and
occupational health services) made possible by the
commitment of the senior management team of the
organisation.
Impact on health equity of intervenons
Inequalities in health status were indirectly addressed as the
whole organisation was open to participate in the activities
and enjoyed the benefits of the HCW programme. In broader
terms, the HCW programme contributed to improving health
equity for permanent and contract staff by partnering with
community and government organisations to participate in
additional wellness activities and receive education on
NCDs. Health equity was a leader-driven priority, whereby
all staff members were encouraged to participate in activities,
irrespective of their employment status within the
organisation. However, full equity was not afforded to
contract workers as they did not have the same advantages of
permanent employees (access to private medical insurers,
time off incentives and access to healthcare facilities on the
commercial plant).
The need to implement a combinaon of
populaon-wide policy intervenons and
individual intervenons
The HCW programme itself targeted the whole workplace-
based population and not just individuals in its systematic
changes to the environment, although it also included
individual-level interventions such as behavioural change
counselling. Implementation of WHPPs of this nature
throughout SA workplaces could contribute to policy
interventions that target the employed population.
Although we were unable to calculate an incremental cost-
effectiveness ratio for the HCW, we believe that given the
very low cost it is likely to meet the WHO best buy criteria of
< $100/disability adjusted life year (DALY) for LMICs.16 If
additional funding can be obtained, such a calculation will be
possible.47
There was no relationship between the HCW programme
and the reduced sick leave. Absenteeism because of illness
may have been influenced by many different factors,
which could mask any impact of the HCW on sickness
from NCDs. The time frame may be too short to determine
the impact of the HCW on NCDs and there are
complications such as cardiovascular events. As the impact
of the HCW will only be felt years later, the HCW needs
further evaluation to determine effectiveness on
absenteeism. The correlation between a reduction in
harmful alcohol use and an increase in sick leave was
unexpected. The reduction in alcohol use was attributed to
the HCW intervention, and it is difficult to explain why
this would lead to an increase in sick leave. Elsewhere a
similar phenomenon has been noted, but attributed to a
link between reduction in alcohol intake and the
development of other illnesses.48 Other studies found a
U-shaped relationship between alcohol consumption and
sickness absenteeism such that people who abstained from
alcohol had higher sickness absenteeism than people who
consumed alcohol moderately.49
Limitaons
Although the incremental costs and consequences have
been compared in this study, it would have been helpful to
calculate an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. A mini
Markov model has been developed for the South African
Page 7 of 8 Original Research
hp://www.phcfm.org Open Access
context to assess the incremental cost effective ratio (ICER)
for interventions on risk factors for NCDs. Unfortunately
the model is available only in the United States, and
additional funds would be needed to analyse the data. This
study did not measure indirect costs (salaries, treatment,
clinical tests, travelling, reimbursements, catering, devices,
etc.) already paid for by the organisation or costs associated
with NCDs borne by the employee.
The before-and-after study design cannot prove the
effectiveness of the HCW per se but has allowed the
researcher to measure changes in risk factors associated
with the intervention. The whole organisation was
exposed to the intervention, which made the selection of
a control group difficult. Improvements in risk factors
could be because of other confounding factors, although
prior to the intervention the annual HRAs suggested a
progressive increase in risk as retrieved from employee
medical records.
Recommendaons
• As the HCW appears to be cost-effective, the programme
could be implemented in other medium and large
enterprises, which have similar organisational settings to
potentially deliver the programme.
• Further evidence of cost-effectiveness should be obtained
from experimental study designs that include full cost-
effectiveness analysis and measurement of the impact on
productivity.
• The low-cost and beneficial consequences of the HCW
support the inclusion of such WHPPs in the National
Department of Health’s policy on NCD prevention and
control.
Conclusion
This study has demonstrated low incremental costs and
substantial beneficial consequences in terms of risk factors
for NCDs in the HCW programme. Despite reductions in risk
factors, there was no reduction in sick leave. This study
supports the value of WHPPs in the SA policy context for
similar large and moderate enterprises to reduce the risk of
NCDs. Future studies should formally measure the
incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and also assess the effect
on productivity.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to the management, participants and
the cooperative inquiry group at the commercial power plant
for their participation, who helped to design the HCW
intervention.
Compeng interests
The authors have declared that no competing interests
exist.
Authors’ contribuons
D.D.S. conceptualised the study. All data were collected and
analysed by D.D.S. This article was written by D.D.S. and
revisions were made by R.M. Both authors approved the final
draft of the article.
Funding informaon
The authors would like to thank the Harry Crossley
Foundation at Stellenbosch University (S15/08/165) and the
Chronic Disease Initiative of Africa (CDIA) for the funding of
this study.
Data availability statement
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data
were created or analysed in this study.
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of
the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or
position of any affiliated agency of the authors.
References
1. World Health Organizaon. NCD mortality and morbidity. Global Health Observatory
(GHO) data, 2018; p. 1. [cited 2019 Oct 10]. Available from: hps://www.who.int/
gho/ncd/mortality_morbidity/en/
2. WHO. Acon plan for the global strategy for the prevenon and control of
noncommunicable diseases 2008–2013. Geneva: World Health Organizaon,
2008; p. 35.
3. Tryon K, Bolnick H, Pomeranz JL, Pronk N, Yach D. Making the workplace a more
eecve site for prevenon of noncommunicable diseases in adults. J Occup
Environ Med. 2014;56(11):1137–1144. hps://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000
000000300
4. Abefgunde D, Mathers C, Adam T, Ortegon M, Strong K. The burden and costs of
chronic diseases in low-income and middle-income countries. Lancet.
2008;370(9603):1929–1935. hps://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61696-1
5. Bloom D, Chisholm D, Llopis E, Prener K. From Burden to “ Best Buys ”: Reducing
the economic impact of non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-
income+countries. hps://www.researchgate.net/publicaon/254417577
6. Bloom D.E, Caero E.T, Jané-Llopis E, et al. The global economic burden of
noncommunicable diseases. Geneva: World Economic Forum; 2011. [cited 2019
Oct 10]. Available from: hp://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Harvard_HE_
GlobalEconomicBurdenNonCommunicableDiseases_2011.pdf
7. Richards NC, Gouda HN, Durham J, Rampage R, Rodney A, Whiaker M.
Disability, noncommunicable disease and health informaon. Bull World Health
Organ. 2016;94(3):230–332. hps://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.15.156869
8. Stascs South Afric. P0309. Stascal Release Mortality and causes of death in
South Africa, 2016: Findings from death nocaon. 2017. Report No.: P0309.3.
[cited 2019 Oct 10]. Available from: hps://www.statssa.gov.za/publicaons/
P03093/P030932016.pdf
9. World Health Organizaon. Prevenng chronic diseases: A vital investment.
World Health Organisaon. 2005;202. [cited 2019 Oct 10]. Available from:
hps://www.who.int/chp/chronic_disease_report/en/
10. Harikrishnan S, Leeder MH S, Jeemon DP P. A race against me: The challenge
of cardiovascular diseases in developing economies. New Delhi: Centre for
Chronic Disease Control, 2014; p. 75.
11. Abegunde DO, Mathers CD, Adam T, Ortegon M, Strong K. The burden and costs
of chronic diseases in low-income and middle-income countries. Lancet.
2007;370(9603):1929–1938. hps://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61696-1
12. Nuys K, Globe D, Ng-Mak D, Cheung H, Sullivan J, Goldman D. The associaon
between employee obesity and employer costs: Evidence from a panel of U.S.
employers. Am J Heal Promot. 2014;28(5):277–285. hps://doi.org/10.4278/
ajhp.120905-QUAN-428
13. Paerson PD, Smith KJ, Hostler D. Cost-eecveness of workplace wellness to
prevent cardiovascular events among U.S. reghters. BMC Cardiovasc Disord.
2016;1–7. hps://doi.org/10.1186/s12872-016-0414-0
14. WHO. Global acon plan for the prevenon and control of noncommunicable
diseases 2013–2020. World Health Organizaon, 2013; p. 102. [cited 2019 Oct 10].
Available from: hps://www.who.int/nmh/events/ncd_acon_plan/en/
Page 8 of 8 Original Research
hp://www.phcfm.org Open Access
15. Quinliani L, Saelmair J, Acvity P, Sorensen G. The workplace as a seng
for intervenons to improve diet and promote physical acvity. World
Health Organizaon; 2007. [cited 2019 Oct 10]. Available from: hps://www.who.
int/dietphysicalacvity/Quinliani- workplace-as-seng.pdf
16. World Health Organizaon (WHO). ‘Best buys’ and other recommended
intervenons for the prevenon and control of noncommunicable diseases. 2017.
[cited 2019 Oct 10]. Available from: hps://www.who.int/ncds/management/
WHO_Appendix_BestBuys.pdf
17. World Health Organisaon. Reducing risks and prevenng disease: Populaon-
wide intervenons. In Global status report on noncommunicable diseases.
2010. chapter 4. [cited 2019 Oct 10]. Available from: hps://www.who.int/
nmh/publicaons/ncd_report2010/en/
18. Naonal Department of Health. Strategic plan for the prevenon and control of
non-communicable diseases 2013–2017. Department of Health; 2013, pp. 1–80.
[cited 2019 Oct 10]. Available from: hps://extranet.who.int/ncdccs/Data/ZAF_
B3_NCDs_STRAT_PLAN_1_29_1_ 3%5B2%5D.pdf
19. Hofman K. Non-communicable diseases in South Africa: A challenge to economic
development. South African Med J [serial online]. 2014 [cited 2019 Dec
13];104(10):674. Available from: hp://www.samj.org.za/index.php/samj/
arcle/view/8727/6218
20. World Health Organizaon. WHO global plan of acon on workers’ health (2008–
2017): Baseline for implementaon. 2013. [cited 2019 Oct 10]. Available from:
hps://www.who.int/occupaonal_health/who_workers_health_web.pdf
21. Shain M, Kramer DM. Health promoon in the workplace: Framing the concept;
Reviewing the evidence. Occup Environ Med. 2004;61(7):643–648. hps://doi.
org/10.1136/oem.2004.013193
22. World Health Organizaon. ‘Best buys’ and other recommended intervenons
for the prevenon and control of noncommunicable diseases. Updated (2017)
Appendix 3 of the Global acon plan for the prevenon and control of
noncommunicable diseases 2013–2020. 2017. [cited 2019 Oct 10]. Available
from: hps://www.who.int/occupaonal_health/who_workers_health_web.pdf
23. Allen LN, Pullar J, Wickramasinghe KK, et al. Evaluaon of research on
intervenons aligned to WHO ‘best buys’ for NCDs in low-income and lower-
middle-income countries: A systemac review from 1990 to 2015. BMJ Glob
Heal. 2018;3(1):e000535. hps://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2017-000535
24. World Health Organizaon (WHO). Scaling up acon against noncommunicable
diseases: How much will it cost? 2011. [cited 2019 Oct 10]. Available from:
hps://www.who.int/nmh/publicaons/cost_of_inacon/en/
25. Collins D, Leibbrandt M. The nancial impact of HIV/AIDS on poor households in
South Africa. AIDS. 2007;21(Supplementary 7):S75–S81. hps://doi.org/10.1097/
01.aids.0000300538.28096.1c
26. Fitzgerald S, Murphy A, Kirby A, et al. Cost-eecveness of a complex workplace
dietary intervenon: An economic evaluaon of the food choice at work study.
2018;8(3)1–9. hps://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019182
27. Proper K, Van Mechelen W. Eecveness and economic impact of worksite
intervenons to promote physical acvity and healthy diet. Background paper
prepared for the WHO/WEF Joint Event. World Health Organizaon; 2008. [cited
2019 Oct 10]. Available from: hps://www.who.int/dietphysicalacvity/
Proper_K.pdf
28. Mceachan RRC, Lawton RJ, Jackson C, Conner M, Meads DM, West RM. Tesng a
workplace physical acvity intervenon: A cluster randomized controlled trial. Int J
Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011;8(29):1–12. hps://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-8-29
29. Jager P, Rees D, Kisng S, et al. Nudging for prevenon in occupaonal health
and safety in South Africa using scal policies. J Environ Occup Heal Policy.
2017;27(2):176–188. hps://doi.org/10.1177/1048291117710782
30. Kolbe-Alexander TL, Proper KI, Lambert EV, et al. Working on wellness (WOW):
A worksite health promoon intervenon programme. BMC Public Health.
2012;12(1):372. hps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22625844
31. Hunter R, Shearer J. Cost-consequences analysis – An underused method of
economic evaluaon. Natl Inst Heal Res [serial online]. 2014 [cited 2020 Jan
8];4–5. Available from: hp://www.rds-london.nihr.ac.uk/How-to-design-a-
study-nd-funding/Health-economics/Cost-consequences-analysis.aspx
32. Babigumira JB. Types of economic evaluaon in healthcare. Healthcare
Evaluaon. 2006;1–5.
33. Schouw D, Mash R, Kolbe-Alexander TL. Transforming the workplace
environment to prevent non-communicable chronic diseases: Parcipatory
acon research in a South African power plant. Glob Health Acon. 2018;11(1).
hps://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2018.1544336
34. Evere-Murphy K, Mash R, Malan Z. Helping people change. 2013; p. 1–68.
35. Schouw D. How to transform the workplace environment to prevent and control
risk factors associated with non-communicable chronic diseases [homepage on the
Internet]. 2019. Available from: hp://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/ 105791
36. Schouw D, Mash RK-AT. Risk factors for non-communicable diseases in the
workforce at a commercial power plant in South Africa – Original research.
Occup Heal South Africa [serial online]. 24(5):145–52. Available from:
hps://journals.co.za/content/journal/10520/EJC-11788d94f9
37. World Health Organizaon. Global physical acvity quesonnaire. analysis guide.
surveillance and populaon based evidence. [cited 2019 Oct 10]. Available from:
https://www.who.int/ncds/surveillance/steps/resources/GPAQ_Analysis_
Guide.pdf
38. Saunders J, Aasland O, Babor T, De la Fuente J, Grant M. Development of the
Alcohol Use Disorders Idencaon Test (AUDIT): WHO collaborave project on
early detecon of persons with harmful alcohol consumpon. Addicon.
1993;88(6):791–804. hps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.1993.tb02093.x
39. Department of Health, Medical Research Council, OrcMacro. South Africa
Demographic and Health Survey 2003. Pretoria: Department of Health; 2007.
40. Smith L. New AHA recommendaons for blood pressure measurement. Am Fam
Physician [serial online]. 2005 [cited 2020 Jan 8];72(7):1391–1396. Available
from: hps://www.aafp.org/afp/2005/1001/p1391.html
41. Totalwellness. Finger-sck cholesterol & glucose screening nger-sck
cholesterol & glucose screening [homepage on the Internet]. 2018; p. 1–4.
Available from: hps://www.totalwellnesshealth.com/wp-content/uploads/
2015/09/Finger-Sck-Procedures.pdf
42. Peer N, Lombard C, Steyn K, Gaziano T, Levi N. Comparability of total
cardiovascular disease risk esmates using laboratory and non-laboratory based
assessments in urban-dwelling South Africans: The CRIBSA study. S Afr Med J.
2014;104(10):691–696. hps://doi.org/10.7196/SAMJ.8125
43. Mogabe T. Guidelines for developing an absenteeism management. Programme
for higher learning. University of Pretoria; 2011. [cited 2019 Oct 10]. Available
from: hps://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/29783/dissertaon.pdf
44. Munro L, Rad ND, Unisa MA, Dip PG, Admin P, Unisa T. Absenteeism and
presenteeism: Possible causes and soluons. S Afr Radiogr. 2007;45(1):21–23.
45. Robroek SJW, Polinder S, Bredt FJ, Burdorf A. Cost-eecveness of a long-term
Internet-delivered worksite health promoon programme on physical acvity
and nutrion: A cluster randomized controlled trial. Health Educ Res.
2012;27(3):399–410. hps://doi.org/10.1093/her/cys015
46. Zhang D, Wang G, Joo H. A systemac review of economic evidence on
community hypertension intervenons. Am J Prev Med. 2017;53(6):S121–S130.
hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2017.05.008
47. Lang J, Clu L, Rineer J, Brown D, N J-J. Building capacity for workplace
health promoon: Findings from the Work@Health® Train-the-Trainer
Program Jason. Heal Promot Pract. 2017;18(6):902–911. hps://doi.org/10.1177/
1524839917715053
48. Uutela A, Johansson E, Bo P. Alcohol consumpon and sickness absence :
Evidence from microdata. Eur J Public Health. 2008;19(1):19–22. hps://doi.
org/10.1093/eurpub/ckn116
49. Ervas J, Kivimäki M, Head J, et al. Sickness absence diagnoses among abstainers,
low-risk drinkers and at-risk drinkers: Consideraon of the U-shaped associaon
between alcohol use and sickness absence in four cohort studies. Addicon.
2018;113(2017):1633–1642. hps://doi.org/10.1111/add.14249