Literature DB >> 8912292

Routine individual feedback on requests for diagnostic tests: an economic evaluation.

R A Winkens1, A J Ament, P Pop, P H Reniers, R P Grol, J A Knottnerus.   

Abstract

The authors assessed the economic cor sequences of routine individual feedback on test requests provided to 85 family physicians in a region with 187,000 inhabitants. In a retrospective study as part of a quasi-experiment, cost trends in a region where feedback was provided over a seven-year period were compared with cost trends elsewhere in The Netherlands without feedback. Data on variable costs were obtained for 400 individual tests that accounted for 90% of all requests. Differences in request trends thus were transformed to savings in costs of diagnostic testing, taking account of the extra costs of providing the feedback. Expenditures for diagnostic testing declined after the start of the feedback, despite the costs of providing the feedback. The savings increased as the feedback continued. Compared with the trend elsewhere without feedback, over seven years a total net sum of 1.4 million U.S. dollars was saved. Routine individual feedback is therefore economically worthwhile.

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8912292     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9601600401

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


  3 in total

Review 1.  Pathology tests: is the time for demand management ripe at last?

Authors:  G Gopal Rao; M Crook; M L Tillyer
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.411

2.  Value for money of changing healthcare services? Economic evaluation of quality improvement.

Authors:  J L Severens
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2003-10

3.  Next-generation sequencing-based genome diagnostics across clinical genetics centers: implementation choices and their effects.

Authors:  Terry Vrijenhoek; Ken Kraaijeveld; Martin Elferink; Joep de Ligt; Elcke Kranendonk; Gijs Santen; Isaac J Nijman; Derek Butler; Godelieve Claes; Adalberto Costessi; Wim Dorlijn; Winfried van Eyndhoven; Dicky J J Halley; Mirjam C G N van den Hout; Steven van Hove; Lennart F Johansson; Jan D H Jongbloed; Rick Kamps; Christel E M Kockx; Bart de Koning; Marjolein Kriek; Ronald Lekanne Dit Deprez; Hans Lunstroo; Marcel Mannens; Olaf R Mook; Marcel Nelen; Corrette Ploem; Marco Rijnen; Jasper J Saris; Richard Sinke; Erik Sistermans; Marjon van Slegtenhorst; Frank Sleutels; Nienke van der Stoep; Marianne van Tienhoven; Martijn Vermaat; Maartje Vogel; Quinten Waisfisz; Janneke Marjan Weiss; Arthur van den Wijngaard; Wilbert van Workum; Helger Ijntema; Bert van der Zwaag; Wilfred F J van IJcken; Johan den Dunnen; Joris A Veltman; Raoul Hennekam; Edwin Cuppen
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-01-28       Impact factor: 4.246

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.