6 resultados para E-mail marketing, Outsourcing, Transaction cost, Specificity, Uncertainty
em DigitalCommons@The Texas Medical Center
Resumo:
This study compared four alternative approaches (Taylor, Fieller, percentile bootstrap, and bias-corrected bootstrap methods) to estimating confidence intervals (CIs) around cost-effectiveness (CE) ratio. The study consisted of two components: (1) Monte Carlo simulation was conducted to identify characteristics of hypothetical cost-effectiveness data sets which might lead one CI estimation technique to outperform another. These results were matched to the characteristics of an (2) extant data set derived from the National AIDS Demonstration Research (NADR) project. The methods were used to calculate (CIs) for data set. These results were then compared. The main performance criterion in the simulation study was the percentage of times the estimated (CIs) contained the “true” CE. A secondary criterion was the average width of the confidence intervals. For the bootstrap methods, bias was estimated. ^ Simulation results for Taylor and Fieller methods indicated that the CIs estimated using the Taylor series method contained the true CE more often than did those obtained using the Fieller method, but the opposite was true when the correlation was positive and the CV of effectiveness was high for each value of CV of costs. Similarly, the CIs obtained by applying the Taylor series method to the NADR data set were wider than those obtained using the Fieller method for positive correlation values and for values for which the CV of effectiveness were not equal to 30% for each value of the CV of costs. ^ The general trend for the bootstrap methods was that the percentage of times the true CE ratio was contained in CIs was higher for the percentile method for higher values of the CV of effectiveness, given the correlation between average costs and effects and the CV of effectiveness. The results for the data set indicated that the bias corrected CIs were wider than the percentile method CIs. This result was in accordance with the prediction derived from the simulation experiment. ^ Generally, the bootstrap methods are more favorable for parameter specifications investigated in this study. However, the Taylor method is preferred for low CV of effect, and the percentile method is more favorable for higher CV of effect. ^
Resumo:
Background. Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) is considered cost effective but screening compliance in the US remains low. There have been very few studies on economic analyses of screening promotion strategies for colorectal cancer. The main aim of the current study is to conduct a cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) and examine the uncertainty involved in the results of the CEA of a tailored intervention to promote screening for CRC among patients of a multispeciality clinic in Houston, TX. ^ Methods. The two intervention arms received a PC based tailored program and web based educational information to promote CRC screening. The incremental cost of implementing a tailored PC based program was compared to the website based education and the status quo of no intervention for each unit of effect after 12 months of delivering the intervention. Uncertainty analysis in the point estimates of cost and effect was conducted using nonparametric bootstrapping. ^ Results. The cost of implementing a web based educational intervention was $36.00 per person and the cost of the tailored PC based interactive intervention was $43.00 per person. The additional cost per person screened for the web-based strategy was $2374 and the effect of the tailored intervention was negative. ^
Resumo:
Expenditures for personal health services in the United States have doubled over the last decade. They continue to outpace the growth rate of the gross national product. Costs for medical care have steadily increased at an annual rate well above the rate of inflation and have gradually outstripped payers' ability to meet their premiums. This limitation of resources justifies the ongoing healthcare reform strategies to maximize utilization and minimize costs. The majority of the cost-containment effort has focused on hospitals, as they account for about 40 percent of total health expenditures. Although good patient outcomes have long been identified as healthcare's central concern, continuing cost pressures from both regulatory reforms and the restructuring of healthcare financing have recently made improving fiscal performance an essential goal for healthcare organizations. ^ The search for financial performance, quality improvement, and fiscal accountability has led to outsourcing, which is the hiring of a third party to perform a task previously and traditionally done in-house. The incomparable nature and overwhelming dissimilarities between health and other commodities raise numerous administrative, organizational, policy and ethical issues for administrators who contemplate outsourcing. This evaluation of the outsourcing phenomenon, how it has developed and is currently practiced in healthcare, will explore the reasons that healthcare organizations gravitate toward outsourcing as a strategic management tool to cut costs in an environment of continuing escalating spending. ^ This dissertation has four major findings. First, it suggests that U.S. hospitals in FY2000 spent an estimated $61 billion in outsourcing. Second, it finds that the proportion of healthcare outsourcing highly correlates with several types of hospital controlling authorities and specialties. Third, it argues that healthcare outsourcing has implications in strategic organizational issues, professionalism, and organizational ethics that warrant further public policy discussions before expanding its limited use beyond hospital “hotel functions” and back office business processes. Finally, it devises an outsourcing suitability scale that organizations can utilize to ensure the most strategic option for outsourcing and concludes with some public policy implications and recommendations for its limited use. ^
Resumo:
The relative merits of PBSCT versus BMT for children with standard and high risk hematologic malignancies remain unclear. In a retrospective single center study, we compared allogeneic peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT) (n=30) with bone marrow transplantation (BMT) (n=110) in children with acute leukemia. We studied recipients of HLA matched sibling stem cells, and of stem cells from alternative donors (HLA mismatched and/or unrelated) and determined whether sourcing the stem cells from PB or marrow affected engraftment, incidence of acute and chronic GvHD, and disease-free survival at 1 year. Our results show a modest reduction in time to engraftment from PB stem cells and no greater risk of GvHD, but illustrate that the severity of the underlying disease is by far the greatest determinant of 1 year survival. Patients in the BMT group had a higher treatment success rate and lower costs than the recipients of the PBSCT within the standard but not the high risk disease group, where the treatment success rate and the cumulative costs were lower in the PBSCT group compared to the BMT group. Our current incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and analysis of uncertainty suggest that allogeneic transplantation of bone marrow grafts was a more cost-effective treatment option compared to peripheral blood stem cells in patients with standard risk childhood acute leukemia disease. For high risk disease our data are less prescriptive, since the differences were more limited and the range of costs much larger. Neither option demonstrated a clear advantage from a cost-effectiveness standpoint.^
Resumo:
Back ground and Purpose. There is a growing consensus among health care researchers that Quality of Life (QoL) is an important outcome and, within the field of family caregiving, cost effectiveness research is needed to determine which programs have the greatest benefit for family members. This study uses a multidimensional approach to measure the cost effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention designed to improve the quality of life of spousal caregivers of stroke survivors. Methods. The CAReS study (Committed to Assisting with Recovery after Stroke) was a 5-year prospective, longitudinal intervention study for 159 stroke survivors and their spousal caregivers upon discharge of the stroke survivor from inpatient rehabilitation to their home. CAReS cost data were analyzed to determine the incremental cost of the intervention per caregiver. The mean values of the quality-of-life predictor variables of the intervention group of caregivers were compared to the mean values of usual care groups found in the literature. Significant differences were then divided into the cost of the intervention per caregiver to calculate the incremental cost effectiveness ratio for each predictor variable. Results. The cost of the intervention per caregiver was approximately $2,500. Statistically significant differences were found between the mean scores for the Perceived Stress and Satisfaction with Life scales. Statistically significant differences were not found between the mean scores for the Self Reported Health Status, Mutuality, and Preparedness scales. Conclusions. This study provides a prototype cost effectiveness analysis on which researchers can build. Using a multidimensional approach to measure QoL, as used in this analysis, incorporates both the subjective and objective components of QoL. Some of the QoL predictor variable scores were significantly different between the intervention and comparison groups, indicating a significant impact of the intervention. The estimated cost of the impact was also examined. In future studies, a scale that takes into account both the dimensions and the weighting each person places on the dimensions of QoL should be used to provide a single QoL score per participant. With participant level cost and outcome data, uncertainty around each cost-effectiveness ratio can be calculated using the bias-corrected percentile bootstrapping method and plotted to calculate the cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.^
Resumo:
Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus healthcare-associated infections (MRSA HAIs) are a major cause of morbidity in hospitalized patients. They pose great economic burden to hospitals caring for these patients. Intensified Interventions aim to control MRSA HAIs. Cost-effectiveness of Intensified Interventions is largely unclear. We performed a review of cost-effectiveness literature on Intensified Interventions , and provide a summary of study findings, the status of economic research in the area, and information that will help decision-makers at regional level and guide future research.^ We conducted literature search using electronic database PubMed, EBSCO, and The Cochrane Library. We limited our search to English articles published after 1999. We reviewed a total of 1,356 titles, and after applying our inclusion and exclusion criteria selected seven articles for our final review. We modified the Economic Evaluation Abstraction Form provided by CDC, and used this form to abstract data from studies.^ Of the seven selected articles two were cohort studies and the remaining five were modeling studies. They were done in various countries, in different study settings, and with different variations of the Intensified Intervention . Overall, six of the seven studies reported that Intensified Interventions were dominant or at least cost-effective in their study setting. This effect persisted on sensitivity testing.^ We identified many gaps in research in this field. The cost-effectiveness research in the field is mostly composed of modeling studies. The studies do not always clearly describe the intervention. The intervention and infection costs and the sources for these costs are not always explicit or are missing. In modeling studies, there is uncertainty associated with some key model inputs, but these inputs are not always identified. The models utilized in the modeling studies are not always tested for internal consistency or validity. Studies usually test the short term cost-effectiveness of Intensified Interventions but not the long results.^ Our study limitation was the inability to adjust for differences in study settings, intervention costs, disease costs, or effectiveness measures. Our study strength is the presentation of a focused literature review of Intensified Interventions in hospital settings. Through this study we provide information that will help decision makers at regional level, help guide future research, and might change clinical care and policies. ^