Report : enabling team collaboration with pervasive and mobile computing : cost benefit analysis methodology

Construction is an information intensive industry in which the accuracy and timeliness of information is paramount. It observed that the main communication issue in construction is to provide a method to exchange data between the site operation, the site office and the head office. The information needs under consideration are time critical to assist in maintaining or improving the efficiency at the jobsite. Without appropriate computing support this may increase the difficulty of problem solving. Many researchers focus their research on the usage of mobile computing devices in the construction industry and they believe that mobile computers have the potential to solve some construction problems that leads to reduce overall productivity. However, to date very limited observation has been conducted in terms of the deployment of mobile computers for construction workers on-site. By providing field workers with accurate, reliable and timely information at the location where it is needed, it will support the effectiveness and efficiency at the job site. Bringing a new technology into construction industry is not only need a better understanding of the application, but also need a proper preparation of the allocation of the resources such as people, and investment. With this in mind, an accurate analysis is needed to provide clearly idea of the overall costs and benefits of the new technology. A cost benefit analysis is a method of evaluating the relative merits of a proposed investment project in order to achieve efficient allocation of resources. It is a way of identifying, portraying and assessing the factors which need to be considered in making rational economic choices. In principle, a cost benefit analysis is a rigorous, quantitative and data-intensive procedure, which requires identification all potential effects, categorisation of these effects as costs and benefits, quantitative estimation of the extent of each cost and benefit associated with an action, translation of these into a common metric such as dollars, discounting of future costs and benefits into the terms of a given year, and summary of all cost and benefit to see which is greater. Even though many cost benefit analysis methodologies are available for a general assessment, there is no specific methodology can be applied for analysing the cost and benefit of the application of mobile computing devices in the construction site. Hence, the proposed methodology in this document is predominantly adapted from Baker et al. (2000), Department of Finance (1995), and Office of Investment Management (2005). The methodology is divided into four main stages and then detailed into ten steps. The methodology is provided for the CRC CI 2002-057-C Project: Enabling Team Collaboration with Pervasive and Mobile Computing and can be seen in detail in Section 3.

The cost-effectiveness of routine follow-up after primary total hip arthroplasty

Routine postsurgery assessment of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is recommended in many countries. Whether the benefits of this activity are justified by the costs is not known. We used a decision-analytic Markov model to compare the costs and health outcomes of 3 different follow-up strategies after primary THA. If there is no routine follow-up of patients for 7 years after primary THA, there would be cost savings between AU$6.5 and $11.9 million and gains of between 1.8 and 8.8 quality-adjusted life years. Policy makers should investigate less resource-intensive alternatives to common routine postsurgical assessment.

Cost effectiveness of antimicrobial catheters in the intensive care unit : Addressing uncertainty in the decision

Introduction: Some types of antimicrobial-coated central venous catheters (A-CVC) have been shown to be cost-effective in preventing catheter-related bloodstream infection (CR-BSI). However, not all types have been evaluated, and there are concerns over the quality and usefulness of these earlier studies. There is uncertainty amongst clinicians over which, if any, antimicrobial-coated central venous catheters to use. We re-evaluated the cost-effectiveness of all commercially available antimicrobialcoated central venous catheters for prevention of catheter-related bloodstream infection in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Methods: We used a Markov decision model to compare the cost-effectiveness of antimicrobial-coated central venous catheters relative to uncoated catheters. Four catheter types were evaluated; minocycline and rifampicin (MR)-coated catheters; silver, platinum and carbon (SPC)-impregnated catheters; and two chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine-coated catheters, one coated on the external surface (CH/SSD (ext)) and the other coated on both surfaces (CH/SSD (int/ext)). The incremental cost per qualityadjusted life-year gained and the expected net monetary benefits were estimated for each. Uncertainty arising from data estimates, data quality and heterogeneity was explored in sensitivity analyses. Results: The baseline analysis, with no consideration of uncertainty, indicated all four types of antimicrobial-coated central venous catheters were cost-saving relative to uncoated catheters. Minocycline and rifampicin-coated catheters prevented 15 infections per 1,000 catheters and generated the greatest health benefits, 1.6 quality-adjusted life-years, and cost-savings, AUD $130,289. After considering uncertainty in the current evidence, the minocycline and rifampicin-coated catheters returned the highest incremental monetary net benefits of $948 per catheter; but there was a 62% probability of error in this conclusion. Although the minocycline and rifampicin-coated catheters had the highest monetary net benefits across multiple scenarios, the decision was always associated with high uncertainty. Conclusions: Current evidence suggests that the cost-effectiveness of using antimicrobial-coated central venous catheters within the ICU is highly uncertain. Policies to prevent catheter-related bloodstream infection amongst ICU patients should consider the cost-effectiveness of competing interventions in the light of this uncertainty. Decision makers would do well to consider the current gaps in knowledge and the complexity of producing good quality evidence in this area.

The cost effectiveness of Naltrexone added to cognitive-behavioral therapy in the treatment of alcohol dependence

he purpose of this study was to evaluate the comparative cost of treating alcohol dependence with either cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) alone or CBT combined with naltrexone (CBT+naltrexone). Two hundred ninety-eight outpatients dependent on alcohol who were consecutively treated for alcohol dependence participated in this study. One hundred seven (36%) patients received adjunctive pharmacotherapy (CBT+naltrexone). The Drug Abuse Treatment Cost Analysis Program was used to estimate treatment costs. Adjunctive pharmacotherapy (CBT+naltrexone) introduced an additional treatment cost and was 54% more expensive than CBT alone. When treatment abstinence rates (36.1% CBT; 62.6% CBT+naltrexone) were applied to cost effectiveness ratios, CBT+naltrexone demonstrated an advantage over CBT alone. There were no differences between groups on a preference-based health measure (SF-6D). In this treatment center, to achieve 100 abstainers over a 12-week program, 280 patients require CBT compared with 160 CBT+naltrexone. The dominant choice was CBT+naltrexone based on modest economic advantages and significant efficiencies in the numbers needed to treat.

Cost effectiveness of osseointegration

Individuals with limb amputation fitted with conventional socket-suspended prostheses often experience socket-related discomfort leading to a significant decrease in quality of life. Bone-anchored prostheses are increasingly acknowledged as viable alternative method of attachment of artificial limb. In this case, the prosthesis is attached directly to the residual skeleton through a percutaneous fixation. To date, a few osseointegration fixations are commercially available. Several devices are at different stages of development particularly in Europe and the US. [1-15] Clearly, surgical procedures are currently blooming worldwide. Indeed, Australia and Queensland, in particular, have one of the fastest growing populations. Previous studies involving either screw-type implants or press-fit fixations for bone-anchorage have focused on biomechanics aspects as well as the clinical benefits and safety of the procedure. [16-25] In principle, bone-anchored prostheses should eliminate lifetime expenses associated with sockets and, consequently, potentially alleviate the financial burden of amputation for governmental organizations. Sadly, publications focusing on cost-effectiveness are sparse. In fact, only one study published by Haggstrom et al (2012), reported that “despite significantly fewer visits for prosthetic service the annual mean costs for osseointegrated prostheses were comparable with socket-suspended prostheses”.[26] Consequently, governmental organizations such as Queensland Artificial Limb Services (QALS) are facing a number of challenges while adjusting financial assistance schemes that should be fair and equitable to their clients fitted with bone-anchored prostheses. Clearly, more scientific evidence extracted from governmental databases is needed to further consolidate the analyses of financial burden associated with both methods of attachment (i.e., conventional sockets prostheses, bone-anchored prostheses). The purposes of the presentation will be: 1. To outline methodological avenues to assess the cost-effectiveness of bone-anchored prostheses compared to conventional sockets prostheses, 2. To highlight the potential obstacles and limitations in cost-effectiveness analyses of bone-anchored prostheses, 3. To present preliminary results of a cost-comparison analysis focusing on the comparison of the costs expressed in dollars over QALS funding cycles for both methods of attachment.

Cost-effectiveness of bone-anchored prosthesis: the Queensland experience

Individuals with limb amputation fitted with conventional socket-suspended prostheses often experience socket-related discomfort leading to a significant decrease in quality of life. Bone-anchored prostheses are increasingly acknowledged as viable alternative method of attachment of artificial limb. In this case, the prosthesis is attached directly to the residual skeleton through a percutaneous fixation. To date, a few osseointegration fixations are commercially available. Several devices are at different stages of development particularly in Europe and the US. [1-15] Clearly, surgical procedures are currently blooming worldwide. Indeed, Australia and Queensland, in particular, have one of the fastest growing populations. Previous studies involving either screw-type implants or press-fit fixations for bone-anchorage have focused on biomechanics aspects as well as the clinical benefits and safety of the procedure. In principle, bone-anchored prostheses should eliminate lifetime expenses associated with sockets and, consequently, potentially alleviate the financial burden of amputation for governmental organizations. Unfortunately, publications focusing on cost-effectiveness are sparse. In fact, only one study published by Haggstrom et al (2012), reported that “despite significantly fewer visits for prosthetic service the annual mean costs for osseointegrated prostheses were comparable with socket-suspended prostheses”. Consequently, governmental organizations such as Queensland Artificial Limb Services (QALS) are facing a number of challenges while adjusting financial assistance schemes that should be fair and equitable to their clients fitted with bone-anchored prostheses. Clearly, more scientific evidence extracted from governmental databases is needed to further consolidate the analyses of financial burden associated with both methods of attachment (i.e., conventional sockets prostheses, bone-anchored prostheses). The purpose of the presentation will be to share the current outcomes of a cost-analysis study lead by QALS. The specific objectives will be: • To outline methodological avenues to assess the cost-effectiveness of bone-anchored prostheses compared to conventional sockets prostheses, • To highlight the potential obstacles and limitations in cost-effectiveness analyses of bone-anchored prostheses, • To present cohort results of a cost-effectiveness (QALY vs cost) including the determination of fair Incremental cost-effectiveness Ratios (ICER) as well as cost-benefit analysis focusing on the comparing costs and key outcome indicators (e.g., QTFA, TUG, 6MWT, activities of daily living) over QALS funding cycles for both methods of attachment.

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of exercise referral schemes: A systematic review and economic evaluation

- Background Exercise referral schemes (ERS) aim to identify inactive adults in the primary-care setting. The GP or health-care professional then refers the patient to a third-party service, with this service taking responsibility for prescribing and monitoring an exercise programme tailored to the needs of the individual. - Objective To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ERS for people with a diagnosed medical condition known to benefit from physical activity (PA). The scope of this report was broadened to consider individuals without a diagnosed condition who are sedentary. - Data sources MEDLINE; EMBASE; PsycINFO; The Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Science; SPORTDiscus and ongoing trial registries were searched (from 1990 to October 2009) and included study references were checked. - Methods Systematic reviews: the effectiveness of ERS, predictors of ERS uptake and adherence, and the cost-effectiveness of ERS; and the development of a decision-analytic economic model to assess cost-effectiveness of ERS. - Results Seven randomised controlled trials (UK, n = 5; non-UK, n = 2) met the effectiveness inclusion criteria, five comparing ERS with usual care, two compared ERS with an alternative PA intervention, and one to an ERS plus a self-determination theory (SDT) intervention. In intention-to-treat analysis, compared with usual care, there was weak evidence of an increase in the number of ERS participants who achieved a self-reported 90-150 minutes of at least moderate-intensity PA per week at 6-12 months' follow-up [pooled relative risk (RR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.25]. There was no consistent evidence of a difference between ERS and usual care in the duration of moderate/vigorous intensity and total PA or other outcomes, for example physical fitness, serum lipids, health-related quality of life (HRQoL). There was no between-group difference in outcomes between ERS and alternative PA interventions or ERS plus a SDT intervention. None of the included trials separately reported outcomes in individuals with medical diagnoses. Fourteen observational studies and five randomised controlled trials provided a numerical assessment of ERS uptake and adherence (UK, n = 16; non-UK, n = 3). Women and older people were more likely to take up ERS but women, when compared with men, were less likely to adhere. The four previous economic evaluations identified suggest ERS to be a cost-effective intervention. Indicative incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) estimates for ERS for various scenarios were based on a de novo model-based economic evaluation. Compared with usual care, the mean incremental cost for ERS was £169 and the mean incremental QALY was 0.008, with the base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at £20,876 per QALY in sedentary people without a medical condition and a cost per QALY of £14,618 in sedentary obese individuals, £12,834 in sedentary hypertensive patients, and £8414 for sedentary individuals with depression. Estimates of cost-effectiveness were highly sensitive to plausible variations in the RR for change in PA and cost of ERS. - Limitations We found very limited evidence of the effectiveness of ERS. The estimates of the cost-effectiveness of ERS are based on a simple analytical framework. The economic evaluation reports small differences in costs and effects, and findings highlight the wide range of uncertainty associated with the estimates of effectiveness and the impact of effectiveness on HRQoL. No data were identified as part of the effectiveness review to allow for adjustment of the effect of ERS in different populations. - Conclusions There remains considerable uncertainty as to the effectiveness of ERS for increasing activity, fitness or health indicators or whether they are an efficient use of resources in sedentary people without a medical diagnosis. We failed to identify any trial-based evidence of the effectiveness of ERS in those with a medical diagnosis. Future work should include randomised controlled trials assessing the cinical effectiveness and cost-effectivenesss of ERS in disease groups that may benefit from PA. - Funding The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Cost-effectiveness of an intervention to reduce emergency re-admissions to hospital among older patients

Background. The objective is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of an intervention that reduces hospital readmission among older people at high risk. A cost-effectiveness model to estimate the costs and health benefits of the intervention was implemented. Methodology/Principal Findings. The model used data from a randomised controlled trial conducted in an Australian tertiary metropolitan hospital. Participants were acute medical admissions aged >65 years with at least one risk factor for readmission: multiple comorbidities, impaired functionality, aged >75 years, 30 recent multiple admissions, poor social support, history of depression. The intervention was a comprehensive nursing and physiotherapy assessment and an individually tailored program of exercise strategies and nurse home visits with telephone follow-up; commencing in hospital and continuing following discharge for 24 weeks. The change to cost outcomes, including the costs of implementing the intervention and all subsequent use of health care services, and, the change to health benefits, represented by quality adjusted life years, were estimated for the intervention as compared to existing practice. The mean change to total costs and quality 38 adjusted life years for an average individual over 24 weeks participating in the intervention were: cost savings of $333 (95% Bayesian credible interval $-1,932:1,282) and 0.118 extra quality adjusted life years (95% Bayesian credible interval 0.1:0.136). The mean net41 monetary-benefit per individual for the intervention group compared to the usual care condition was $7,907 (95% Bayesian credible interval $5,959:$9,995) for the 24 week period. Conclusions/Significance. The estimation model that describes this intervention predicts cost savings and improved health outcomes. A decision to remain with existing practices causes unnecessary costs and reduced health. Decision makers should consider adopting this 46 program for elderly hospitalised patients.

Cost-effectiveness of a telephone-delivered intervention for physical activity and diet

Background: Given escalating rates of chronic disease, broad-reach and cost-effective interventions to increase physical activity and improve dietary intake are needed. The cost-effectiveness of a Telephone Counselling intervention to improve physical activity and diet, targeting adults with established chronic diseases in a low socio-economic area of a major Australian city was examined. Methodology/Principal Findings: A cost-effectiveness modelling study using data collected between February 2005 and November 2007 from a cluster-randomised trial that compared Telephone Counselling with a “Usual Care” (brief intervention) alternative. Economic outcomes were assessed using a state-transition Markov model, which predicted the progress of participants through five health states relating to physical activity and dietary improvement, for ten years after recruitment. The costs and health benefits of Telephone Counselling, Usual Care and an existing practice (Real Control) group were compared. Telephone Counselling compared to Usual Care was not cost-effective ($78,489 per quality adjusted life year gained). However, the Usual Care group did not represent existing practice and is not a useful comparator for decision making. Comparing Telephone Counselling outcomes to existing practice (Real Control), the intervention was found to be cost-effective ($29,375 per quality adjusted life year gained). Usual Care (brief intervention) compared to existing practice (Real Control) was also cost-effective ($12,153 per quality adjusted life year gained). Conclusions/Significance: This modelling study shows that a decision to adopt a Telephone Counselling program over existing practice (Real Control) is likely to be cost-effective. Choosing the ‘Usual Care’ brief intervention over existing practice (Real Control) shows a lower cost per quality adjusted life year, but the lack of supporting evidence for efficacy or sustainability is an important consideration for decision makers. The economics of behavioural approaches to improving health must be made explicit if decision makers are to be convinced that allocating resources toward such programs is worthwhile.

Cost-effectiveness of a central venous catheter care bundle

Background: A bundled approach to central venous catheter care is currently being promoted as an effective way of preventing catheter-related bloodstream infection (CR-BSI). Consumables used in the bundled approach are relatively inexpensive which may lead to the conclusion that the bundle is cost-effective. However, this fails to consider the nontrivial costs of the monitoring and education activities required to implement the bundle, or that alternative strategies are available to prevent CR-BSI. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a bundle to prevent CR-BSI in Australian intensive care patients. ---------- Methods and Findings: A Markov decision model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the bundle relative to remaining with current practice (a non-bundled approach to catheter care and uncoated catheters), or use of antimicrobial catheters. We assumed the bundle reduced relative risk of CR-BSI to 0.34. Given uncertainty about the cost of the bundle, threshold analyses were used to determine the maximum cost at which the bundle remained cost-effective relative to the other approaches to infection control. Sensitivity analyses explored how this threshold alters under different assumptions about the economic value placed on bed-days and health benefits gained by preventing infection. If clinicians are prepared to use antimicrobial catheters, the bundle is cost-effective if national 18-month implementation costs are below $1.1 million. If antimicrobial catheters are not an option the bundle must cost less than $4.3 million. If decision makers are only interested in obtaining cash-savings for the unit, and place no economic value on either the bed-days or the health benefits gained through preventing infection, these cost thresholds are reduced by two-thirds.---------- Conclusions: A catheter care bundle has the potential to be cost-effective in the Australian intensive care setting. Rather than anticipating cash-savings from this intervention, decision makers must be prepared to invest resources in infection control to see efficiency improvements.

Investigating the cost-effectiveness of video telephone based support for newly diagnosed paediatric oncology patients and their families: design of a randomised controlled trial

Background Providing ongoing family centred support is an integral part of childhood cancer care. For families living in regional and remote areas, opportunities to receive specialist support are limited by the availability of health care professionals and accessibility, which is often reduced due to distance, time, cost and transport. The primary aim of this work is to investigate the cost-effectiveness of videotelephony to support regional and remote families returning home for the first time with a child newly diagnosed with cancer Methods/design We will recruit 162 paediatric oncology patients and their families to a single centre randomised controlled trial. Patients from regional and remote areas, classified by Accessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia (ARIA+) greater than 0.2, will be randomised to a videotelephone support intervention or a usual support control group. Metropolitan families (ARIA+ ≤ 0.2) will be recruited as an additional usual support control group. Families allocated to the videotelephone support intervention will have access to usual support plus education, communication, counselling and monitoring with specialist multidisciplinary team members via a videotelephone service for a 12-week period following first discharge home. Families in the usual support control group will receive standard care i.e., specialist multidisciplinary team members provide support either face-to-face during inpatient stays, outpatient clinic visits or home visits, or via telephone for families who live far away from the hospital. The primary outcome measure is parental health related quality of life as measured using the Medical Outcome Survey (MOS) Short Form SF-12 measured at baseline, 4 weeks, 8 weeks and 12 weeks. The secondary outcome measures are: parental informational and emotional support; parental perceived stress, parent reported patient quality of life and parent reported sibling quality of life, parental satisfaction with care, cost of providing improved support, health care utilisation and financial burden for families. Discussion This investigation will establish the feasibility, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of using videotelephony to improve the clinical and psychosocial support provided to regional and remote paediatric oncology patients and their families.

Screening, isolation, and decolonisation strategies in the control of meticillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus in intensive care units : cost effectiveness evaluation

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of screening, isolation and decolonisation strategies in the control of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in intensive care units (ICUs). Design: Economic evaluation. Setting: England and Wales. Population: ICU patients. Main outcome measures: Infections, deaths, costs, quality adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for alternative strategies, net monetary benefits (NMBs). Results: All strategies using isolation but not decolonisation improved health outcomes but increased costs. When MRSA prevalence on admission to the ICU was 5% and the willingness to pay per QALY gained was between £20,000 and £30,000, the best such strategy was to isolate only those patients at high risk of carrying MRSA (either pre-emptively or following identification by admission and weekly MRSA screening using chromogenic agar). Universal admission and weekly screening using polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based MRSA detection coupled with isolation was unlikely to be cost-effective unless prevalence was high (10% colonised with MRSA on admission to the ICU). All decolonisation strategies improved health outcomes and reduced costs. While universal decolonisation (regardless of MRSA status) was the most cost-effective in the short-term, strategies using screening to target MRSA carriers may be preferred due to reduced risk of selecting for resistance. Amongst such targeted strategies, universal admission and weekly PCR screening coupled with decolonisation with nasal mupirocin was the most cost-effective. This finding was robust to ICU size, MRSA admission prevalence, the proportion of patients classified as high-risk, and the precise value of willingness to pay for health benefits. Conclusions: MRSA control strategies that use decolonisation are likely to be cost-saving in an ICU setting provided resistance is lacking, and combining universal PCR-based screening with decolonisation is likely to represent good value for money if untargeted decolonisation is considered unacceptable. In ICUs where decolonisation is not implemented there is insufficient evidence to support universal MRSA screening outside high prevalence settings.