CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 17

A healthcare utilization cost comparison between employees receiving a worksite mindfulness or a diet/exercise lifestyle intervention to matched controls 5 years post intervention

Klatt, Maryanna D., Sieck, Cynthia, Gascon, Gregg, Malarkey, William, Huerta, Timothy·2016·Complementary Therapies in Medicine
DOI 10.1016/j.ctim.2016.05.008
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective To compare healthcare costs and utilization among participants in a study of two active lifestyle interventions implemented in the workplace and designed to foster awareness of and attention to health with a propensity score matched control group. Design and setting We retrospectively compared changes in healthcare (HC) utilization among participants in the mindfulness intervention (n=84) and the diet/exercise intervention (n=86) to a retrospectively matched control group (n=258) drawn for this study. The control group was matched from the non-participant population on age, gender, relative risk score, and HC expenditures in the 9 month preceding the study. Main outcome measures Measures included number of primary care visits, number and cost of pharmacy prescriptions, number of hospital admissions, and overall healthcare costs tracked for 5 years after the intervention. Results Significantly fewer primary care visits (p Conclusion This study provides valuable information as to the cost savings and value of providing workplace lifestyle interventions that focus on awareness of one's body and health. Health economic studies validate the scale of personal and organization health cost savings that such programs can generate.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ctim.2016.05.008

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Studies across a variety of work settings have found investment in mindfulness programs leads to increased productivity and reduced healthcare usage by employees.

    “Studies across a variety of work settings have found investment in mindfulness programs leads to increased productivity and reduced healthcare usage by employees, which can help make the business case for employers to provide such programs (Huberty et al., 2022; Klatt et al., 2016).”

    From The effects of mindfulness meditation on burnout in clinical genetic counselors: A three-arm randomized controlled trial (2026) · cites this paper as Klatt et al., 2016

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Klatt, M. D., Sieck, C., Gascon, G., Malarkey, W., & Huerta, T.
ORCID
Venue
Complementary Therapies in Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-08
Volume
27
Pages
139-144
ISSN
0965-2299
DOI
10.1016/j.ctim.2016.05.008
Cited by
17
References
6
Language
en
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review