Does the Triple P-Positive Parenting Program provide value for money?

Objective: The aim of the present study was to investigate the economic case for the implementation of the Triple P- Positive Parenting Program on a population basis in Queensland, Australia, in order to reduce the prevalence of conduct disorder in children. Method: Threshold analysis was undertaken together with a limited cost-effectiveness analysis. Results: The Triple P-Positive Parenting Program is a dominant intervention; that is, it costs less than the amount it saves, until the reduction in prevalence falls below 7% where net costs become positive. Conclusions: Triple P is likely to be a worthwhile use of limited health funds. The economic case is promising, but further research is required to confirm the study results.

Colorectal cancer screening in Australia: an economic evaluation of a potential biennial screening program using faecal occult blood tests

Objective: To evaluate whether the introduction of a national, co-ordinated screening program using the faecal occult blood test represents 'value-for-money' from the perspective of the Australian Government as third-party funder. Methods: The annual equivalent costs and consequences of a biennial screening program in 'steady-state' operation were estimated for the Australian population using 1996 as the reference year. Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and the years of life lost (YLLs) averted, and the health service costs were modelled, based on the epidemiology and the costs of colorectal cancer in Australia together with the mortality reduction achieved in randomised controlled trials. Uncertainty in the model was examined using Monte Carlo simulation methods. Results: We estimate a minimum or 'base program' of screening those aged 55 to 69 years could avert 250 deaths per annum (95% uncertainty interval 99-400), at a gross cost of $A55 million (95% UI $A46 million to $A96 million) and a gross incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $A17,000/DALY (95% UI $A13,000/DALY to $A52,000/DALY). Extending the program to include 70 to 74-year-olds is a more effective option (cheaper and higher health gain) than including the 50 to 54-year-olds. Conclusions: The findings of this study support the case for a national program directed at the 55 to 69-year-old age group with extension to 70 to 74-year-olds if there are sufficient resources. The pilot tests recently announced in Australia provide an important opportunity to consider the age range for screening and the sources of uncertainty, identified in the modelled evaluation, to assist decisions on implementing a full national program.

Is modern medicine at risk of losing the plot?

Contemporary medicine has much to its credit, but has created an insatiable demand for new technologies and more health services, fed by commercial promotion, professional advocacy and sociopolitical pressure. Total health expenditure at the national level is now almost 10% of gross domestic product and is expected to top 16% by 2020. After recent inquiries into the failings of its public health system, the Queensland Government has committed itself to a 25% increase in expenditure on health over the next 5 years. But will it lead to better population health, and is it sustainable? The return-on-investment curve for modern health care may be flattening out, in an environment of growing numbers of older patients with chronic illnesses, maldistribution of services and hospital overcrowding. A change in thinking is required if current medical practice is to avoid imploding when confronted with the next major economic downturn. Health policy, service funding and clinical training must focus on critical appraisal of the effectiveness of health care technologies and the structure and financing of health care systems. Practising clinicians will be obliged to provide leadership in determining value for money in the choice of health care for specific patient populations and how that care is delivered.

The Function and Consequences of Alternative Fresh Produce Supply Chain Models

Around the world, consumers and retailers of fresh produce are becoming more and more discerning about factors such as food safety and traceability, health, convenience and the sustainability of production systems, and in doing so they are changing the way in which fresh produce supply chains are configured and managed. When consumers demand fresh, safe, convenient, value-for-money produce, retailers in an increasingly competitive environment are attracted to those business models most capable of meeting these demands profitably. Traditional models are proving less and less able to deliver competitive advantage in such an environment. As a result, opportunistic, adversarial, price-based approaches to doing business between chain members are being replaced by approaches that are more strategic, collaborative and value-based. The shaping force behind this change is the need for producers, wholesalers, category managers, retailers and consumers to have more certainty about the performance of the supply chains upon which they rely. Certainty is generated through the supply chain's ability to create, deliver and share value. How to build supply chains that create, deliver and share value is arguably the single biggest challenge to the competitiveness of fresh produce firms, and therefore to the industries to which they belong.