Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 18, 2025
Visualization of Intensity Levels to Reduce the Gap Between Self-Reported and Directly Measured Physical Activity
Published on: March 7, 2019
Cost-Effectiveness and Return-on-Investment of the Dynamic Work Intervention Compared With Usual Practice to Reduce
Ângela J Ben1, Judith G M Jelsma, Lidewij R Renaud
1Department of Health Sciences, Faculty Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute (Dr Ben, Dr van Dongen, Dr Bosmans); and Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC (Dr Jelsma, Ms Renaud, Dr Huysmans, Dr van Nassau, Dr van der Beek, Dr van der Ploeg), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Objective:
To assess the cost-effectiveness and return-on-investment (ROI) of the Dynamic Work (DW) Intervention, a worksite intervention aimed at reducing sitting time among office workers.
Methods:
In total, 244 workers were randomized to the intervention or control group. Overall sitting time, standing time, step counts, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs were measured over 12 months. The cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the societal perspective and the ROI analysis from the employers' perspective.
Results:
No significant differences in effects and societal costs were observed between groups. Presenteeism costs were significantly lower in the intervention group. The probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 0.90 at a willingness-to-pay of 20,000&OV0556;/QALY. The probability of financial savings was 0.86.
Conclusion:
The intervention may be considered cost-effective from the societal perspective depending on the willingness-to-pay. From the employer perspective, the intervention seems cost-beneficial.
