Literature DB >> 33437174

Minimally important difference in cost savings: Is it possible to identify an MID for cost savings?

Mary Dooley1, Annie N Simpson1, Paul J Nietert2, Dunc Williams1, Kit N Simpson1,2.   

Abstract

As healthcare costs continue to increase, studies assessing costs are becoming increasingly common, but researchers planning for studies that measure costs differences (savings) encounter a lack of literature or consensus among researchers on what constitutes "small" or "large" cost savings for common measures of resource use.  Other fields of research have developed approaches to solve this type of problem. Researchers measuring improvement in quality of life or clinical assessments have defined minimally important differences (MID) which are then used to define magnitudes when planning studies. Also, studies that measure cost effectiveness use benchmarks, such as cost/QALY, but do not provide benchmarks for cost differences. In a review of the literature, we found no publications identifying indicators of magnitude for costs. However, the literature describes three approaches used to identify minimally important outcome differences: (1) anchor-based, (2) distribution-based, and (3) a consensus-based Delphi methods. In this exploratory study, we used these three approaches to derive MID for two types of resource measures common in costing studies for: (1) hospital admissions (high cost); and (2) clinic visits (low cost). We used data from two (unpublished) studies to implement the MID estimation. Because the distributional characteristics of cost measures may require substantial samples, we performed power analyses on all our estimates to illustrate the effect that the definitions of "small" and "large" costs may be expected to have on power and sample size requirements for studies. The anchor-based method, while logical and simple to implement, may be of limited value in cases where it is difficult to identify appropriate anchors. We observed some commonalities and differences for the distribution and consensus-based approaches, which require further examination. We recommend that in cases where acceptable anchors are not available, both the Delphi and the distribution-method of MID for costs be explored for convergence.
© The Author(s) 2021.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cost savings; MID; Minimally important differences

Year:  2021        PMID: 33437174      PMCID: PMC7790477          DOI: 10.1007/s10742-020-00233-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol        ISSN: 1387-3741


  1 in total

1.  Guest Editorial: Articles selected from the 2020 International Conference on Health Policy Statistics.

Authors:  Catherine M Crespi; Ofer Harel
Journal:  Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol       Date:  2021-02-02
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.