Literature DB >> 27105651

How to Invest in Getting Cost-effective Technologies into Practice? A Framework for Value of Implementation Analysis Applied to Novel Oral Anticoagulants.

Rita Faria1, Simon Walker1, Sophie Whyte2, Simon Dixon2, Stephen Palmer1, Mark Sculpher1.   

Abstract

Cost-effective interventions are often implemented slowly and suboptimally in clinical practice. In such situations, a range of implementation activities may be considered to increase uptake. A framework is proposed to use cost-effectiveness analysis to inform decisions on how best to invest in implementation activities. This framework addresses 2 key issues: 1) how to account for changes in utilization in the future in the absence of implementation activities; and 2) how to prioritize implementation efforts between subgroups. A case study demonstrates the framework's application: novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for the prevention of stroke in the National Health Service in England and Wales. The results suggest that there is value in additional implementation activities to improve uptake of NOACs, particularly in targeting patients with average or poor warfarin control. At a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, additional investment in an educational activity that increases the utilization of NOACs by 5% in all patients currently taking warfarin generates an additional 254 QALYs, compared with 973 QALYs in the subgroup with average to poor warfarin control. However, greater value could be achieved with higher uptake of anticoagulation more generally: switching 5% of patients who are potentially eligible for anticoagulation but are currently receiving no treatment or are using aspirin would generate an additional 4990 QALYs. This work can help health services make decisions on investment at different points of the care pathway or across disease areas in a manner consistent with the value assessment of new interventions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical practice guidelines; cost utility analysis; efficiency; resource allocation; technology assessment

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27105651     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X16645577

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


  5 in total

Review 1.  Discrete Event Simulation-Based Resource Modelling in Health Technology Assessment.

Authors:  Syed Salleh; Praveen Thokala; Alan Brennan; Ruby Hughes; Simon Dixon
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Impact of missed treatment opportunities on outcomes in hospitalised patients with heart failure.

Authors:  Simon Walker; Eldon Spackman; Nathalie Conrad; Connor A Emdin; Ed Griffin; Kazem Rahimi; Mark Sculpher
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2017-12-22

3.  Subcategorizing the Expected Value of Perfect Implementation to Identify When and Where to Invest in Implementation Initiatives.

Authors:  Kasper Johannesen; Magnus Janzon; Tomas Jernberg; Martin Henriksson
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2020-03-05       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  Antimicrobial-impregnated central venous catheters for preventing neonatal bloodstream infection: the PREVAIL RCT.

Authors:  Ruth Gilbert; Michaela Brown; Rita Faria; Caroline Fraser; Chloe Donohue; Naomi Rainford; Alessandro Grosso; Ajay K Sinha; Jon Dorling; Jim Gray; Berit Muller-Pebody; Katie Harron; Tracy Moitt; William McGuire; Laura Bojke; Carrol Gamble; Sam J Oddie
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 4.106

5.  Implementing Interventions with Varying Marginal Cost-Effectiveness: An Application in Precision Medicine.

Authors:  Stuart J Wright; Mike Paulden; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 2.583

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.