HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: AJPH.2006.091033v1 97/9/1650    most recent Submit a response View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Danis, M. Articles by Aomo, T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Danis, M. Articles by Aomo, T. Related Collections Health Policy Health Promotion Socioeconomic Factors Other Statistics/Evaluation/Research

Marion Danis, MD, Francis Lovett, PhD, Lindsay Sabik, BA, Katherin Adikes, BA, Glen Cheng, BA and Tom Aomo, BA

At the time of the study, Marion Danis, Francis Lovett, Lindsay Sabik, and Katherin Adikes were with the Department of Clinical Bioethics, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Md; Glen Cheng was with the Department of Clinical Bioethics, New Jersey College of Medicine and Dentistry, Newark; and Tom Aomo was an information technology consultant in Hartford, Conn.

Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Marion Danis, MD, Department of Clinical Bioethics, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bldg 10, Rm 1C118, Bethesda, MD 20982–1156 (e-mail: mdanis{at}nih.gov).

Objectives. Socioeconomic factors are associated with reduced health status in low-income populations. We sought to identify affordable employment benefit packages that might ameliorate these socioeconomic factors and would be consonant with employees’ priorities.

Methods. Working in groups (n = 53), low-income employees (n = 408; 62% women, 65% Black) from the Washington, DC, and Baltimore, Md, metropolitan area, participated in a computerized exercise in which they expressed their preference for employment benefit packages intended to address socioeconomic determinants of health. The hypothetical costs of these benefits reflected those of the average US benefit package available to low-income employees. Questionnaires ascertained sociodemographic information and attitudes. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analysis were used to examine benefit choices.

Results. Groups chose offered benefits in the following descending rank order: health care, retirement, vacation, disability pay, training, job flexibility, family time, dependent care, monetary advice, anxiety assistance, wellness, housing assistance, and nutrition programs. Participants varied in their personal choices, but 78% expressed willingness to abide by their groups’ choices.

Conclusions. It is possible to design employment benefits that ameliorate socioeconomic determinants of health and are acceptable to low-income employees. These benefit packages can be provided at the cost of benefit packages currently available to some low-income employees.