How to present work productivity loss results from clinical trials for patients and caregivers? A mixed methods approach.

OBJECTIVES: From the perspectives of patients and caregivers, the objectives were: identifying which result presentations, describing work productivity loss (WPL) outcomes, are most understandable; measuring which presentations are important to report; and investigating which WPL outcomes are viewed as important alongside clinical trials results. METHODS: We used a four phased, sequential mixed methods design, guided by patient-oriented research engaging one patient partner. We conducted think-aloud interviews, in British Columbia/Canada, to review WPL results and our survey measuring the understandability and importance of the results, and importance of each WPL outcome. We surveyed a sample representing working Canadians. The findings were summarized and analyzed using linear and logistic regression. We conducted sub-group analyses; one was gender based. All regressions were conducted using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: In our qualitative phases, 20 patients and caregivers were interviewed. Participants recommended for the results to be brief, simple, and represented visually. Then, 118 patients and 120 caregivers were surveyed. The results presented in days or cost yielded the highest understandability and importance to report. All WPL outcomes were identified as important to somewhat important to report by most. The associations indicated that the more understandable the result presentation was, the more likely it was to be rated as important. Age was the only factor significantly associated with selecting days or cost as the most important result. CONCLUSION: Presenting WPL results in days and cost, using lay terms and visual supports, were viewed as easiest to understand and most important to report in clinical trials by patients and caregivers. Our findings are supportive of clinical trials standardizing the measurement of WPL to include all of its outcomes (absenteeism, presenteeism, employment status changes and total work productivity loss), in addition to tools assessing the comprehensiveness of WPL results to be provided to patients and caregivers.

Measuring, Analyzing, and Presenting Work Productivity Loss in Randomized Controlled Trials: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to conduct a scoping review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and investigate which work productivity loss outcomes were measured in these RCTs, how each outcome was measured and analyzed, and how the results for each outcome were presented. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted from January 2010 to April 2020 from 2 databases: PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Data on country, study population, disease focus, sample size, work productivity loss outcomes measured (absenteeism, presenteeism, employment status changes), and methods used to measure, report, and analyze each work productivity loss outcome were extracted and analyzed. RESULTS: We found 435 studies measuring absenteeism or presenteeism, of which 155 studies (35.6%) measured both absenteeism and presenteeism and were included in our final review. Only 9 studies also measured employment status changes. The most used questionnaire was the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire. The analysis of absenteeism and presenteeism data was mostly done using regression models (n = 98, n = 98, respectively) for which a normal distribution was assumed (n = 77, n = 89, respectively). Absenteeism results were most often presented in time whereas presenteeism was commonly presented using a percent scale or score. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of consensus on how to measure, analyze, and present work productivity loss outcomes in RCTs published in the past 10 years. The diversity of measurement, analysis, and presentation methods used in RCTs may make comparability challenging. There is a need for guidelines providing recommendations to standardize the comprehensiveness and the appropriateness of methods used to measure, analyze, and report work productivity loss in RCTs.

The Impact of Caregiving Length and Intensity on Labor Force Participation Among Middle-Aged Canadians: An Analysis of Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging Data.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the association between caregiving length/intensity and labor force participation among middle-aged Canadians. METHODS: We used baseline data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. Labor force participation status included working full-time, part-time, part retirement, complete retirement, and nonparticipation. We defined caregiving length as short-term versus long-term, and intensity as low, medium, and high. Multinomial logistic regressions and instrumental variable method were used. RESULTS: Compared with non-caregivers, long-term and high-intensity caregivers were more likely to be completely retired, partly retired, and nonparticipants. Short-term and high-intensity caregivers were more likely to be completely retired, partly retired, and nonparticipants for women. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings emphasize the importance of considering caregiving intensity and length. Prioritizing support for long-term and high-intensity caregivers and promoting partial retirement or part-time working opportunities could help retain caregivers in the labor force.

Substitutes or complements between informal and formal home care in the Canadian longitudinal study on aging: Functional impairment as an effect modifier.

In Canada and around the world, policy makers are struggling with funding between informal care and formal home care. Understanding the relationship between the two types of care is helpful to inform funding allocations. In this study, we examined the relationship between informal care and formal home care and assessed whether this relationship varies across levels of functional impairment using the Canadian Longitudinal Survey of Aging (CLSA). Our study population was baseline CLSA participants between 2011 and 2015 who were functionally impaired. We used self-reported measures of total hours of informal and formal home care received over 12 months and evaluated their relationship using a two-part model and an instrumental variable method. Our results emphasized the importance of accounting for the potential endogeneity of informal care. We consistently found that there was a negative relationship between informal care hours and the probability of receiving formal home care among middle-aged and older adults and a negative coefficient of the interaction term between informal care hours and functional impairment level. The results suggest that there is a substitution relationship between informal care and formal home care and that this substitution relationship is stronger for highly impaired middle-aged and older individuals. Our findings will help policy makers understand the complexity of the relationship between informal and formal home care and implement policies accordingly.