At what price? A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing trial of labour after previous caesarean versus elective repeat caesarean delivery

Background: Elective repeat caesarean delivery (ERCD) rates have been increasing worldwide, thus prompting obstetric discourse on the risks and benefits for the mother and infant. Yet, these increasing rates also have major economic implications for the health care system. Given the dearth of information on the cost-effectiveness related to mode of delivery, the aim of this paper was to perform an economic evaluation on the costs and short-term maternal health consequences associated with a trial of labour after one previous caesarean delivery compared with ERCD for low risk women in Ireland.Methods: Using a decision analytic model, a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed where the measure of health gain was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over a six-week time horizon. A review of international literature was conducted to derive representative estimates of adverse maternal health outcomes following a trial of labour after caesarean (TOLAC) and ERCD. Delivery/procedure costs derived from primary data collection and combined both "bottom-up" and "top-down" costing estimations.Results: Maternal morbidities emerged in twice as many cases in the TOLAC group than the ERCD group. However, a TOLAC was found to be the most-effective method of delivery because it was substantially less expensive than ERCD ((sic)1,835.06 versus (sic)4,039.87 per women, respectively), and QALYs were modestly higher (0.84 versus 0.70). Our findings were supported by probabilistic sensitivity analysis.Conclusions: Clinicians need to be well informed of the benefits and risks of TOLAC among low risk women. Ideally, clinician-patient discourse would address differences in length of hospital stay and postpartum recovery time. While it is premature advocate a policy of TOLAC across maternity units, the results of the study prompt further analysis and repeat iterations, encouraging future studies to synthesis previous research and new and relevant evidence under a single comprehensive decision model.

Planning a portfolio of controls for software development

A growing number of software development projects successfully exhibit a mix of agile and traditional software development methodologies. Many of these mixed methodologies are organization specific and tailored to a specific project. Our objective in this research-in-progress paper is to develop an artifact that can guide the development of such a mixed methodology. Using control theory, we design a process model that provides theoretical guidance to build a portfolio of controls that can support the development of a mixed methodology for software development. Controls, embedded in methods, provide a generalizable and adaptable framework for project managers to develop their mixed methodology specific to the demands of the project. A research methodology is proposed to test the model. Finally, future directions and contributions are discussed.

ITSM ProcessGuide – a longitudinal and multi-method field study for real-world DSR artifact evaluation

Process guidance supports users to increase their process model understanding, process execution effectiveness as well as efficiency, and process compliance performance. This paper presents a research in progress encompassing our ongoing DSR project on Process Guidance Systems and a field evaluation of the resulting artifact in cooperation with a company. Building on three theory-grounded design principles, a Process Guidance System artifact for the company’s IT service ticketing process is developed, deployed and used. Fol-lowing a multi-method approach, we plan to evaluate the artifact in a longitudinal field study. Thereby, we will not only gather self-reported but also real usage data. This article describes the development of the artifact and discusses an innovative evaluation approach.

In two minds about screening: an investigation of cervical cancer prevention among Irish women

Cervical cancer is the second most common female cancer worldwide. Cervical screening programmes can reduce the incidence of cervical cancer by up to 80 percent if the invited women participate. Previous Irish research has associated screening attendance with subjective norms, anticipated regret, higher socio-economic status and education. Greater perceived screening barriers and lacking knowledge were associated with avoidance. These findings support a variety of expectancy-value theories of behaviour. They also suggest that expectancy-value theories could benefit from the inclusion of affective predictors of behaviour, like anticipated regret. In 2008 the Republic of Ireland introduced the National Cervical Screening Programme (NCSP). This research seeks to identify the predictors of participation in the NCSP. A systematic review of reviews showed that predictors of screening participation clustered into environmental and psychological influences. There is a gap in the evidence synthesis of associations with personal characteristics and health beliefs. Thematic analysis of focus group interviews confirmed the validity of many screening predictors identified by the systematic review and expectancy-value theories. A survey of these predictors suggested that reduced screening barriers might encourage first-time participation, while regular attendance requires greater endorsement of screening benefits and stronger subjective norm and intention. Positive attitude, rather than knowledge, appeared to be crucial for strong intention, so the final study piloted an experiment comparing the utility of positive attitude in strengthening intention to the utility of information provision. Despite lacking significant differences between conditions, content analysis of participant comments suggested that a full trial would be worthwhile, given purposive sampling and improved sample retention. These findings agree with previous Irish research on the importance of screening intention, although its association with attitude appeared to be stronger in the present research. The findings further indicate that future screening promotion should consider interventions based on patients’ experiences of screening.