Economics and preventing healthcare acquired infection

The evolution of organisms that cause healthcare acquired infections (HAI) puts extra stress on hospitals already struggling with rising costs and demands for greater productivity and cost containment. Infection control can save scarce resources, lives, and possibly a facility’s reputation, but statistics and epidemiology are not always sufficient to make the case for the added expense. Economics and Preventing Healthcare Acquired Infection presents a rigorous analytic framework for dealing with this increasingly serious problem. ----- Engagingly written for the economics non-specialist, and brimming with tables, charts, and case examples, the book lays out the concepts of economic analysis in clear, real-world terms so that infection control professionals or infection preventionists will gain competence in developing analyses of their own, and be confident in the arguments they present to decision-makers. The authors: ----- Ground the reader in the basic principles and language of economics. ----- Explain the role of health economists in general and in terms of infection prevention and control. ----- Introduce the concept of economic appraisal, showing how to frame the problem, evaluate and use data, and account for uncertainty. ----- Review methods of estimating and interpreting the costs and health benefits of HAI control programs and prevention methods. ----- Walk the reader through a published economic appraisal of an infection reduction program. ----- Identify current and emerging applications of economics in infection control. ---- Economics and Preventing Healthcare Acquired Infection is a unique resource for practitioners and researchers in infection prevention, control and healthcare economics. It offers valuable alternate perspective for professionals in health services research, healthcare epidemiology, healthcare management, and hospital administration. ----- Written for: Professionals and researchers in infection control, health services research, hospital epidemiology, healthcare economics, healthcare management, hospital administration; Association of Professionals in Infection Control (APIC), Society for Healthcare Epidemiologists of America (SHEA)

From expert to tasks, expert nursing practice redefined?

Aim The aim of this paper was to explore the concept of expertise in nursing from the perspective of how it relates to current driving forces in health care in which it discusses the potential barriers to acceptance of nursing expertise in a climate in which quantification of value and cost containment run high on agendas. Background Expert nursing practice can be argued to be central to high quality, holistic, individualized patient care. However, changes in government policy which have led to the inception of comprehensive guidelines or protocols of care are in danger of relegating the ‘expert nurse’ to being an icon of the past. Indeed, it could be argued that expert nurses are an expensive commodity within the nursing workforce. Consequently, with this change to the use of clinical guidelines, it calls into question how expert nursing practice will develop within this framework of care. Method The article critically reviews the evidence related to the role of the Expert Nurse in an attempt to identify the key concepts and ideas, and how the inception of care protocols has implications for their role. Conclusion Nursing expertise which focuses on the provision of individualized, holistic care and is based largely on intuitive decision making cannot, should not be reduced to being articulated in positivist terms. However, the dominant power and decision-making focus in health care means that nurses must be confident in articulating the value of a concept which may be outside the scope of knowledge of those with whom they are debating. Relevance to clinical practice The principles of abduction or fuzzy logic may be useful in assisting nurses to explain in terms which others can comprehend, the value of nursing expertise.

Defining the expert ICU nurse

This paper explores the concept of expertise in intensive care nursing practice from the perspective of its relationship to the current driving forces in healthcare. It discusses the potential barriers to acceptance of nursing expertise in a climate in which quantification of value and cost containment run high on agendas. It argues that nursing expertise which focuses on the provision of individualised, holistic care and which is based largely on intuitive decision-making cannot and should not be reduced to being articulated in positivist terms. The principles of abduction or fuzzy logic, derived from computer science, may be useful in assisting nurses to explain in terms, which others can comprehend, the value of nursing expertise.

Case management in action: An examination of two cases in the area of alcohol related brain damage

‘Practice Forum’ provides a forum for social work practitioners to share their practice with others; to describe what they are doing and assess its effectiveness. The practice of case management is applied in a wide range of service delivery models to meet complex client needs. Unfortunately, cost containment and lack of clarity of the role of the case manager has blurred the definition and practice of case management for both the consumer and professional providers. This article examines two cases of a small non-government agency in Melbourne called Alcohol Related Brain Injury Assessment, Accommodation & Support Inc. (ARBIAS) where case management services are delivered to people with alcohol acquired brain damage. The analysis presented here supports the view that continuity of care and intensive relationship building with clients is vital for successful client outcomes and has application to a variety of programs which service chronically disabled clients.

Reducing the global burden of depression : population level analysis of intervention cost-effectiveness in 14 world regions

International evidence on the cost and effects of interventions for reducing the global burden of depression remain scarce. Aims: To estimate the population-level cost-effectiveness of evidence-based depression interventions and their contribution towards reducing current burden. Method: Primary-care-based depression interventions were modelled at the level of whole populations in 14 epidemiological subregions of the world. Total population-level costs (in international dollars or I$) and effectiveness (disability adjusted life years (DALYs) averted) were combined to form average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Results: Evaluated interventions have the potential to reduce the current burden of depression by 10–30%. Pharmacotherapy with older antidepressant drugs, with or without proactive collaborative care, are currently more cost-effective strategies than those using newer antidepressants, particularly in lower-income subregions. Conclusions: Even in resource-poor regions, each DALYaverted by efficient depression treatments in primary care costs less than 1 year of average per capita income, making such interventions a cost-effective use of health resources. However, current levels of burden can only be reduced significantlyif there is a substantialincrease substantial increase intreatment coverage.

Correcting for bias when estimating the cost of hospital-acquired infection : an analysis of lower respiratory tract infections in non-surgical patients

Hospital acquired infections (HAI) are costly but many are avoidable. Evaluating prevention programmes requires data on their costs and benefits. Estimating the actual costs of HAI (a measure of the cost savings due to prevention) is difficult as HAI changes cost by extending patient length of stay, yet, length of stay is a major risk factor for HAI. This endogeneity bias can confound attempts to measure accurately the cost of HAI. We propose a two-stage instrumental variables estimation strategy that explicitly controls for the endogeneity between risk of HAI and length of stay. We find that a 10% reduction in ex ante risk of HAI results in an expected savings of £693 ($US 984).