Literature DB >> 18263559

The value of implementation and the value of information: combined and uneven development.

Elisabeth Fenwick1, Karl Claxton, Mark Sculpher.   

Abstract

AIM: In a budget-constrained health care system, the decision to invest in strategies to improve the implementation of cost-effective technologies must be made alongside decisions regarding investment in the technologies themselves and investment in further research. This article presents a single, unified framework that simultaneously addresses the problem of allocating funds between these separate but linked activities.
METHODS: The framework presents a simple 4-state world where both information and implementation can be either at the current level or "perfect.'' Through this framework, it is possible to determine the maximum return to further research and an upper bound on the value of adopting implementation strategies. The framework is illustrated through case studies of health care technologies selected from those previously considered by the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE).
RESULTS: Through the case studies, several key factors that influence the expected values of perfect information and perfect implementation are identified. These factors include the maximum acceptable cost-effectiveness ratio, the level of uncertainty surrounding the adoption decision, the expected net benefits associated with the technologies, the current level of implementation, and the size of the eligible population.
CONCLUSIONS: Previous methods for valuing implementation strategies have not distinguished the value of efficacy research and the value of strategies to change the level of implementation. This framework demonstrates that the value of information and the value of implementation can be examined separately but simultaneously in a single framework. This can usefully inform policy decisions about investment in health care services, further research, and adopting implementation strategies that are likely to differ between technologies.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18263559     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X07308751

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  48 in total

1.  Assessing differences between physicians' realized and anticipated gains from electronic health record adoption.

Authors:  Lori T Peterson; Eric W Ford; John Eberhardt; Timothy R Huerta; Nir Menachemi
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2009-08-08       Impact factor: 4.460

2.  Decision-analytic modeling to assist decision making in organizational innovation: the case of shared care in hearing aid provision.

Authors:  Janneke P C Grutters; Manuela A Joore; Frans Van Der Horst; Robert J Stokroos; Lucien J C Anteunis
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-06-03       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Quantitative Methods for Valuing Comparative Effectiveness Information.

Authors:  Anirban Basu; David Meltzer
Journal:  Biopharm Rep       Date:  2010

4.  A model to transfer trial-based pharmacoeconomic analyses to clinical practice.

Authors:  Afschin Gandjour
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  The appropriate elicitation of expert opinion in economic models: making expert data fit for purpose.

Authors:  William Sullivan; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  A New Informatics Geography.

Authors:  E Coiera
Journal:  Yearb Med Inform       Date:  2016-11-10

7.  Are Evidence Standards Different for Genomic- vs. Clinical-Based Precision Medicine? A Quantitative Analysis of Individualized Warfarin Therapy.

Authors:  D S Dhanda; G F Guzauskas; J J Carlson; A Basu; D L Veenstra
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2017-07-10       Impact factor: 6.875

8.  Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves revisited.

Authors:  Maiwenn J Al
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 9.  A systematic and critical review of the evolving methods and applications of value of information in academia and practice.

Authors:  Lotte Steuten; Gijs van de Wetering; Karin Groothuis-Oudshoorn; Valesca Retèl
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  A CTSA agenda to advance methods for comparative effectiveness research.

Authors:  Mark Helfand; Sean Tunis; Evelyn P Whitlock; Stephen G Pauker; Anirban Basu; Jon Chilingerian; Frank E Harrell; David O Meltzer; Victor M Montori; Donald S Shepard; David M Kent
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.689

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.