Literature DB >> 25118084

STAR--people-powered prioritization: a 21st-century solution to allocation headaches.

Mara Airoldi1, Alec Morton2, Jenifer A E Smith3, Gwyn Bevan1.   

Abstract

The aim of cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) is to inform the allocation of scarce resources. CEA is routinely used in assessing the cost-effectiveness of specific health technologies by agencies such as the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in England and Wales. But there is extensive evidence that because of barriers of accessibility and acceptability, CEA has not been used by local health planners in their annual task of allocating fixed budgets to a wide range of types of health care. This paper argues that these planners can use Socio Technical Allocation of Resources (STAR) for that task. STAR builds on the principles of CEA and the practice of program budgeting and marginal analysis. STAR uses requisite models to assess the cost-effectiveness of all interventions considered for resource reallocation by explicitly applying the theory of health economics to evidence of scale, costs, and benefits, with deliberation facilitated through an interactive social process of engaging key stakeholders. In that social process, the stakeholders generate missing estimates of scale, costs, and benefits of the interventions; develop visual models of their relative cost-effectiveness; and interpret the results. We demonstrate the feasibility of STAR by showing how it was used by a local health planning agency of the English National Health Service, the Isle of Wight Primary Care Trust, to allocate a fixed budget in 2008 and 2009.
© The Author(s) 2014.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cost effectiveness analysis; decision aid; deliberative approach; local health planning; priority setting; resource allocation; stakeholder engagement

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25118084     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X14546376

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


  4 in total

1.  Multi-criteria Decision Analysis Software in Healthcare Priority Setting: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Alexander Moreno-Calderón; Thai S Tong; Praveen Thokala
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Utilization of multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to support healthcare decision-making FIFARMA, 2016.

Authors:  Julia I Drake; Juan Carlos Trujillo de Hart; Clara Monleón; Walter Toro; Joice Valentim
Journal:  J Mark Access Health Policy       Date:  2017-10-12

3.  How does priority setting for resource allocation happen in commissioning dental services in a nationally led, regionally delivered system: a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with NHS England dental commissioners.

Authors:  Christopher Robert Vernazza; Greig Taylor; Cam Donaldson; Joanne Gray; Richard Holmes; Katherine Carr; Catherine Exley
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-03-23       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Evidence-informed capacity building for setting health priorities in low- and middle-income countries: A framework and recommendations for further research.

Authors:  Ryan Li; Francis Ruiz; Anthony J Culyer; Kalipso Chalkidou; Karen J Hofman
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2017-03-07
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.