Development of a cost-effectiveness model for guardrail selection. Executive summary. Final report.

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C.

Development of a cost-effectiveness model for guardrail selection. Volume I: technical documentation. Final report.

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C.

Cost-effectiveness of countermeasures for utility pole accidents. Final report.

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C.

Development of a cost-effectiveness model for guardrail selection. Volume II: user's manual. Final report.

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C.

Cost-effectiveness and safety of alternative roadway delineation treatments for rural two-lane highways. Vol. I. Executive summary. Final report.

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C.

Assessment of techniques for cost-effectiveness of highway accident countermeasures - executive summary.

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Research, Washington, D.C.

Assessment of techniques for cost-effectiveness of highway accident countermeasures. Final report.

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Research, Washington, D.C.

Non-resident Violator Compact - fiscal impact/cost effectiveness: a case study. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Cost effectiveness of small highway sign supports - a summary report. Final report.

Federal Highway Administration, Implementation Division, Washington, D.C.

Cost-effectiveness of countermeasures for utility pole accidents - appendixes A-N. Final report.

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of heroin detoxification methods in the Australian National Evaluation of Pharmacotherapies for Opioid Dependence (NEPOD)

This economic evaluation was part of the Australian National Evaluation of Pharmacotherapies for Opioid Dependence (NEPOD) project. Data from four trials of heroin detoxification methods, involving 365 participants, were pooled to enable a comprehensive comparison of the cost-effectiveness of five inpatient and outpatient detoxification methods. This study took the perspective of the treatment provider in assessing resource use and costs. Two short-term outcome measures were used-achievement of an initial 7-day period of abstinence, and entry into ongoing post-detoxification treatment. The mean costs of the various detoxification methods ranged widely, from AUD $491 (buprenorphine-based outpatient); to AUD $605 for conventional outpatient; AUD $1404 for conventional inpatient; AUD $1990 for rapid detoxification under sedation; and to AUD $2689 for anaesthesia per episode. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out using conventional outpatient detoxification as the base comparator. The buprenorphine-based outpatient detoxification method was found to be the most cost-effective method overall, and rapid opioid detoxification under sedation was the most costeffective inpatient method.

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.

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.

Comparing the cost-effectiveness of MRSA control strategies between ICU and non-ICU settings

Introduction / objectives Many strategies are used to control MRSA in hospitals. Only a few have been assessed in clinical trials and it is not obvious how findings should be generalised between settings. Uncertainty remains about which strategies represent the most appropriate use of scarce resources. We assess the cost-effectiveness of alternative MRSA screening and infection control strategies in England and Wales and discuss international relevance. Methods Models of MRSA transmission in ICUs and general medical (GM) wards were developed and used to evaluate different screening methods combined with decolonisation or isolation. Strategies were compared in terms of costs and health benefits (quality adjusted life years, QALYs). Different prevalences, proportions of high risk patients and ward sizes were investigated, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) conducted. Results Decolonisation strategies were cost-saving in ICUs at a 5% admission prevalence, with admission and weekly PCR screening the most cost-effective (£3,929/QALY). In ICUs, screening and isolation reduced infection rates by ~10%. With admission prevalence ≤5%, targeting screening and isolation to high risk patients was optimal. In GM wards decolonisation and isolation strategies, though able to reduce MRSA infection rates up to ~50%, were not cost-effective. Conclusion The largest reductions in MRSA infection were achieved by screening and decolonisation strategies, and were cost-effective in ICU settings. In comparison, there is limited potential for screening and control strategies to be cost-effective in GM wards due to lower infection and mortality rates.