103 research outputs found

    MO4 - Using AHP weights to fill missing gaps in Markov decision models

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVES:\ud We propose to combine the versatility of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) with the decision-analytic sophistication of health-economic modeling in a new methodology for early technology assessment. As an illustration, we apply this methodology to a new technology to diagnose breast cancer.\ud \ud METHODS:\ud The AHP is a technique for multicriteria analysis, relatively new in the fi eld of technology assessment. It can integrate both quantitative and qualitative criteria in the assessment of alternative technologies. We applied the AHP to prioritize a more versatile set of outcome measures than most Markov models do. These outcome measures include clinical effectiveness and costs, but also weighted estimates of patient comfort and safety. Furthermore, as no clinical data are available for this technology yet, the AHP is applied to predict the performance of the new technology with regard to all these outcome measures. Results of the AHP are subsequently integrated in a Markov model to make an early assessment of the expected incremental cost-effectiveness of alternative technologies.\ud \ud RESULTS:\ud We systematically estimated priors on the clinical effectiveness and wider impacts of the new technology using AHP. In our illustration, AHP estimates for sensitivity and specifi city of the new diagnostic technology were used as probability parameters in the Markov model. Moreover, the prioritized outcome measures including clinical effectiveness (weight = 0.61), patient comfort (weight = 0.09), and safety (weight = 0.30) were integrated into one outcome measure in the Markov model.\ud \ud CONCLUSIONS:\ud Combining AHP and Markov modelling is particularly valuable in early technology assessment when evidence about the effectiveness of health care technology is still limited or missing. Moreover, combining these methods is valuable when decision makers are interested in other patient relevant outcomes measures besides the technology’s clinical effectiveness, and that may not (adequately or explicitly) be captured in mainstream utility measures

    PCN10 ARE FURTHER STUDIES OF BREAST CANCER TUMOR MARKERS TO DETECT RECURRENCE WORTHWHILE? A VALUE OF RESEARCH ANALYSIS

    Get PDF
    Cuello, Ramon (escultor)Primer pla de l'obra. Davant de la casa on vivia l'escultor a Sants hi havia hagut una fonda on paraven les diligències que unien l'interior de Catalunya amb el port de Barcelona. De metall, mesura 2,58 x 0,80 x 0,80 metres

    Identifying potentially cost effective chronic care programs for people with COPD

    Get PDF
    Objective: To review published evidence regarding the cost effectiveness of multi-component COPD programs and to illustrate how potentially cost effective programs can be identified. Methods: Systematic search of Medline and Cochrane databases for evaluations of multicomponent disease management or chronic care programs for adults with COPD, describing process, intermediate, and end results of care. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers and descriptively summarized. Results: Twenty articles describing 17 unique COPD programs were included. There is little evidence for significant improvements in process and intermediate outcomes, except for increased provision of patient self-management education and improved disease-specific knowledge. Overall, the COPD programs generate end results equivalent to usual care, but programs containing ≥3 components show lower relative risks for hospitalization. There is limited scope for programs to break-even or save money. Conclusion: Identifying cost effective multi-component COPD programs remains a challenge due to scarce methodologically sound studies that demonstrate significant improvements on process, intermediate and end results of care. Estimations of potential cost effectiveness of specific programs illustrated in this paper can, in the absence of 'perfect data', support timely decision-making regarding these programs. Nevertheless, well-designed health economic studies are needed to decrease the current decision uncertainty

    Exploring what lies behind public preferences for avoiding health losses caused by lapses in healthcare safety and patient lifestyle choices

    Get PDF
    © 2013 Singh et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0),which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.This article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund.Background: Although many studies have identified public preferences for prioritising health care interventions based on characteristics of recipient or care, very few of them have examined the reasons for the stated preferences. We conducted an on-line person trade-off (PTO) study (N=1030) to investigate whether the public attach a premium to the avoidance of ill health associated with alternative types of responsibilities: lapses in healthcare safety, those caused by individual action or lifestyle choice; or genetic conditions. We found that the public gave higher priority to prevention of harm in a hospital setting such as preventing hospital associated infections than genetic disorder but drug administration errors were valued similar to genetic disorders. Prevention of staff injuries, lifestyle diseases and sports injuries, were given lower priority. In this paper we aim to understand the reasoning behind the responses by analysing comments provided by respondents to the PTO questions. Method: A majority of the respondents who participated in the survey provided brief comments explaining preferences in free text responses following PTO questions. This qualitative data was transformed into explicit codes conveying similar meanings. An overall coding framework was developed and a reliability test was carried out. Recurrent patterns were identified in each preference group. Comments which challenged the assumptions of hypothetical scenarios were also investigated. Results: NHS causation of illness and a duty of care were the most cited reasons to prioritise lapses in healthcare safety. Personal responsibility dominated responses for lifestyle related contexts, and many respondents mentioned that health loss was the result of the individual’s choice to engage in risky behaviour. A small proportion of responses questioned the assumptions underlying the PTO questions. However excluding these from the main analysis did not affect the conclusions. Conclusion: Although some responses indicated misunderstanding or rejection of assumptions we put forward, the results were still robust. The reasons put forward for responses differed between comparisons but responsibility was the most frequently cited. Most preference elicitation studies only focus on eliciting numerical valuations but allowing for qualitative data can augment understanding of preferences as well as verifying results.EPSRC through the MATCH programme(EP/F063822/1 and EP/G012393/1) and HERG within Brunel University

    The health economic impact of disease management programs for COPD: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

    Get PDF
    __Abstract__ Background: There is insufficient evidence of the cost-effectiveness of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Disease Management (COPD-DM) programs. The aim of this review is to evaluate the economic impact of COPD-DM programs and investigate the relation between the impact on healthcare costs and health outcomes. We also investigated the impact of patient-, intervention, and study-characteristics.Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review to identify cost-effectiveness studies of COPD-DM. Where feasible, results were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis and explorative subgroup analyses were performed.Results: Sixteen papers describing 11 studies were included (7 randomized control trials (RCT), 2 pre-post, 2 case-control). Meta-analysis showed that COPD-DM led to hospitalization savings of €1060 (95% CI: €2040 to €80) per patient per year and savings in total healthcare uti
    corecore