Does reduced employment protection increase the employment disadvantage of workers with low education and poorer health?

BACKGROUND: Declines in employment protection may have disproportionate effects on employment opportunities of workers with low education and poorer health. This study investigates the impact of changes in employment protection levels on employment rates according to education and health in 23 European countries. METHODS: Data were taken from the 4-year rotating panel European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions study. Employed participants aged 29-59 years (n = 334 999) were followed for 1 year over an 11-year period, from 2003 up to 2014. A logistic regression model with country and period fixed effects was used to estimate the association between changes in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) employment protection index and labour market outcomes, incorporating interaction terms with education and health. RESULTS: 15 of the 23 countries saw their level of employment protection decline between 2003 and 2014. Reduced employment protection of temporary workers increased odds of early retirement (OR 6.29, 95% CI 3.17 to 12.48) and unemployment (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.76). Reduced employment protection of permanent workers increased odds of early retirement more among workers in poor health (OR 4.46, 95% CI 2.26 to 8.78) than among workers in good health (OR 2.58, 95% CI 1.30 to 5.10). The impact of reduced employment protection of temporary workers on unemployment was stronger among lower-educated workers (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.90) than among higher-educated workers (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.54). CONCLUSION: Reduced employment protection increased the odds of early exit from paid employment, especially among workers with lower education and poorer health. Employment protection laws may help reduce the employment disadvantage of workers with low education and poorer health.

Economic evaluation of primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases in mild hypertension: a scenario analysis for the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands, antihypertensive treatment for patients with mild hypertension is recommended if the 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk exceeds 20%. Recent evidence suggests that lifelong CVD risk estimates might be more informative than 10-year ones. In addition, the cost of antihypertensive treatment in the Netherlands has decreased during the last decade. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of lowering systolic blood pressure (SBP) in patients ineligible for treatment in both a 10-year and a lifetime horizon. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of SBP reduction compared with no reduction in patients with mild hypertension and low CVD risk. Modified SCORE (Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation) risk estimates were used to predict fatal and nonfatal CVD events. We analyzed scenarios for different age groups, sexes, and SBP reductions. Specifically, SBP reductions due to hydrochlorothiazide (HCT) 25 mg and hypothetical reductions with HCT 12.5 mg-losartan 50 mg combination were assumed. Parameter uncertainty was assessed through a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: In a 10-year horizon, in scenarios of SBP reduction with HCT 25 mg, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) estimates for men varied across different ages in the range of €6032 to €58,217 per life-year gained, whereas for women ICER estimates were in the range of €12,345 to €361,064 per life-year gained. In a lifetime horizon, the cost-effectiveness estimates were favorable for both sexes. In scenarios of hypothetical SBP reductions, more favorable ICER estimates compared with no reduction were found. A large uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness estimates was observed among all scenarios. CONCLUSION: Larger SBP reductions were found to be cost-effective in both a 10-year and lifetime horizon. These findings might call for more aggressive SBP reductions in patients with mild hypertension. However, a high level of uncertainty surrounds these cost-effectiveness estimates because they are based on CVD risk prediction modeling.