Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Military Hearing Conservation Program

被引:7
|
作者
Garcia, Seth L. [1 ]
Smith, Kenneth J. [2 ]
Palmer, Catherine [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Pittsburgh, Dept Commun Sci & Disorders, 4028 Forbes Tower, Pittsburgh, PA 15260 USA
[2] Univ Pittsburgh, Dept Clin & Translat Sci, 200 Meyran Ave,Suite 300, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
[3] Univ Pittsburgh, Sch Med, Dept Otolaryngol, 203 Lothrop St,Suite 500, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
关键词
NOISE; WORKERS; HEALTH; TINNITUS;
D O I
10.1093/milmed/usx112
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction: Occupational noise threatens U.S. worker health and safety and commands a significant financial burden on state and federal government worker compensation programs. Previous studies suggest that hearing conservation programs have contributed to reduced occupational hearing loss for noise-exposed workers. Many military personnel are overexposed to noise and are provided hearing conservation services. Select military branches require all active duty personnel to follow hearing conservation program guidelines, regardless of individual noise exposure. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a military hearing conservation program, relative to no intervention, in relation to cases of hearing loss prevented. Methods: We employed cost-effectiveness analytic methods to compare the costs and effectiveness, in terms of hearing loss cases prevented, of a military hearing conservation program relative to no program. We used costs and probability estimates available in the literature and publicly available sources. The effectiveness of the interventions was analyzed based on whether hearing loss occurred over a 20-yr time frame. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the hearing conservation program compared with no intervention was $10,657 per case of hearing loss prevented. Workers were 28% less likely to sustain hearing loss in our model when they received the hearing conservation program compared with no intervention, which reflected the greater effectiveness of the hearing conservation program. Cost-effectiveness results were sensitive to estimated values for the probability of acquiring hearing loss from both interventions and the cost of hearing protection. We performed a Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis where we simultaneously varied all the model parameters to their extreme plausible bounds. When we ran 10,000 Monte Carlo iterations, we observed that the hearing conservation program was more cost-effective in 99% of cases when decision makers were willing to pay $64,172 per case of hearing loss prevented. Conclusions: Conceding a lifetime cost for service-related compensation for hearing loss per individual of $64,172, the Department of Defense Hearing Conservation Program is an economically reasonable program relative to no intervention, if a case of hearing loss avoided costs $10,657. Considering the net difference of the costs and comparative benefits of both treatment strategies, providing a hearing conservation program for all active duty military workers may be a cost-effective intervention for the Department of Defense.
引用
收藏
页码:E547 / E553
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Cost-Effectiveness of an Injury and Drowning Prevention Program in Bangladesh
    Rahman, Fazlur
    Bose, Saideep
    Linnan, Michael
    Rahman, Aminur
    Mashreky, Saidur
    Haaland, Benjamin
    Finkelstein, Eric
    PEDIATRICS, 2012, 130 (06) : E1621 - E1628
  • [12] The Next Chapter in Cost-effectiveness Analysis
    Roberts, Mark S.
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2016, 316 (10): : 1049 - 1050
  • [13] Cost-effectiveness analysis for heterogeneous samples
    Moreno, E.
    Giron, F. J.
    Vazquez-Polo, F. J.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2016, 254 (01) : 127 - 137
  • [14] Cost-effectiveness Analysis with Influence Diagrams
    Arias, M.
    Diez, F. J.
    METHODS OF INFORMATION IN MEDICINE, 2015, 54 (04) : 353 - 358
  • [15] Cost-effectiveness analysis in infectious diseases
    Paul, M.
    CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTION, 2010, 16 (12) : 1705 - 1706
  • [16] Hemorrhoid Banding: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
    Coughlin, Ohmar P.
    Wright, Moriah E.
    Thorson, Alan G.
    Ternent, Charles A.
    DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM, 2019, 62 (09) : 1085 - 1094
  • [17] The contribution of focus groups in the evaluation of hearing conservation program (HCP) effectiveness
    Prince, MM
    Colligan, MJ
    Stephenson, CM
    Bischoff, BJ
    JOURNAL OF SAFETY RESEARCH, 2004, 35 (01) : 91 - 106
  • [18] Cost-effectiveness analysis of a gender-neutral human papillomavirus vaccination program in the Netherlands
    Simons, Joost J. M.
    Vida, Nora
    Westra, Tjalke A.
    Postma, Maarten J.
    VACCINE, 2020, 38 (30) : 4687 - 4694
  • [19] Nutritional Policy Changes in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: A Microsimulation and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
    Basu, Sanjay
    Seligman, Hilary
    Bhattacharya, Jay
    MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2013, 33 (07) : 937 - 948
  • [20] Long-term cost-effectiveness of screening strategies for hearing loss
    Liu, Chuan-Fen
    Collins, Margaret P.
    Souza, Pamela E.
    Yueh, Bevan
    JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, 2011, 48 (03): : 235 - 243