Cargando…

Evaluation of a predevelopment service delivery intervention: an application to improve clinical handovers

BACKGROUND: We developed a method to estimate the expected cost-effectiveness of a service intervention at the design stage and ‘road-tested’ the method on an intervention to improve patient handover of care between hospital and community. METHOD: The development of a nine-step evaluation framework:...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yao, Guiqing Lily, Novielli, Nicola, Manaseki-Holland, Semira, Chen, Yen-Fu, van der Klink, Marcel, Barach, Paul, Chilton, Peter J, Lilford, Richard J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Group 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3551195/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22976505
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001210
_version_ 1782256532476395520
author Yao, Guiqing Lily
Novielli, Nicola
Manaseki-Holland, Semira
Chen, Yen-Fu
van der Klink, Marcel
Barach, Paul
Chilton, Peter J
Lilford, Richard J
author_facet Yao, Guiqing Lily
Novielli, Nicola
Manaseki-Holland, Semira
Chen, Yen-Fu
van der Klink, Marcel
Barach, Paul
Chilton, Peter J
Lilford, Richard J
author_sort Yao, Guiqing Lily
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We developed a method to estimate the expected cost-effectiveness of a service intervention at the design stage and ‘road-tested’ the method on an intervention to improve patient handover of care between hospital and community. METHOD: The development of a nine-step evaluation framework: 1. Identification of multiple endpoints and arranging them into manageable groups; 2. Estimation of baseline overall and preventable risk; 3. Bayesian elicitation of expected effectiveness of the planned intervention; 4. Assigning utilities to groups of endpoints; 5. Costing the intervention; 6. Estimating health service costs associated with preventable adverse events; 7. Calculating health benefits; 8. Cost-effectiveness calculation; 9. Sensitivity and headroom analysis. RESULTS:     Literature review suggested that adverse events follow 19% of patient discharges, and that one-third are preventable by improved handover (ie, 6.3% of all discharges). The intervention to improve handover would reduce the incidence of adverse events by 21% (ie, from 6.3% to 4.7%) according to the elicitation exercise. Potentially preventable adverse events were classified by severity and duration. Utilities were assigned to each category of adverse event. The costs associated with each category of event were obtained from the literature. The unit cost of the intervention was €16.6, which would yield a Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gain per discharge of 0.010. The resulting cost saving was €14.3 per discharge. The intervention is cost-effective at approximately €214 per QALY under the base case, and remains cost-effective while the effectiveness is greater than 1.6%. CONCLUSIONS: We offer a usable framework to assist in ex ante health economic evaluations of health service interventions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3551195
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BMJ Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35511952013-01-23 Evaluation of a predevelopment service delivery intervention: an application to improve clinical handovers Yao, Guiqing Lily Novielli, Nicola Manaseki-Holland, Semira Chen, Yen-Fu van der Klink, Marcel Barach, Paul Chilton, Peter J Lilford, Richard J BMJ Qual Saf Original Research BACKGROUND: We developed a method to estimate the expected cost-effectiveness of a service intervention at the design stage and ‘road-tested’ the method on an intervention to improve patient handover of care between hospital and community. METHOD: The development of a nine-step evaluation framework: 1. Identification of multiple endpoints and arranging them into manageable groups; 2. Estimation of baseline overall and preventable risk; 3. Bayesian elicitation of expected effectiveness of the planned intervention; 4. Assigning utilities to groups of endpoints; 5. Costing the intervention; 6. Estimating health service costs associated with preventable adverse events; 7. Calculating health benefits; 8. Cost-effectiveness calculation; 9. Sensitivity and headroom analysis. RESULTS:     Literature review suggested that adverse events follow 19% of patient discharges, and that one-third are preventable by improved handover (ie, 6.3% of all discharges). The intervention to improve handover would reduce the incidence of adverse events by 21% (ie, from 6.3% to 4.7%) according to the elicitation exercise. Potentially preventable adverse events were classified by severity and duration. Utilities were assigned to each category of adverse event. The costs associated with each category of event were obtained from the literature. The unit cost of the intervention was €16.6, which would yield a Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gain per discharge of 0.010. The resulting cost saving was €14.3 per discharge. The intervention is cost-effective at approximately €214 per QALY under the base case, and remains cost-effective while the effectiveness is greater than 1.6%. CONCLUSIONS: We offer a usable framework to assist in ex ante health economic evaluations of health service interventions. BMJ Group 2012-12 2012-09-13 /pmc/articles/PMC3551195/ /pubmed/22976505 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001210 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcode
spellingShingle Original Research
Yao, Guiqing Lily
Novielli, Nicola
Manaseki-Holland, Semira
Chen, Yen-Fu
van der Klink, Marcel
Barach, Paul
Chilton, Peter J
Lilford, Richard J
Evaluation of a predevelopment service delivery intervention: an application to improve clinical handovers
title Evaluation of a predevelopment service delivery intervention: an application to improve clinical handovers
title_full Evaluation of a predevelopment service delivery intervention: an application to improve clinical handovers
title_fullStr Evaluation of a predevelopment service delivery intervention: an application to improve clinical handovers
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of a predevelopment service delivery intervention: an application to improve clinical handovers
title_short Evaluation of a predevelopment service delivery intervention: an application to improve clinical handovers
title_sort evaluation of a predevelopment service delivery intervention: an application to improve clinical handovers
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3551195/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22976505
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001210
work_keys_str_mv AT yaoguiqinglily evaluationofapredevelopmentservicedeliveryinterventionanapplicationtoimproveclinicalhandovers
AT noviellinicola evaluationofapredevelopmentservicedeliveryinterventionanapplicationtoimproveclinicalhandovers
AT manasekihollandsemira evaluationofapredevelopmentservicedeliveryinterventionanapplicationtoimproveclinicalhandovers
AT chenyenfu evaluationofapredevelopmentservicedeliveryinterventionanapplicationtoimproveclinicalhandovers
AT vanderklinkmarcel evaluationofapredevelopmentservicedeliveryinterventionanapplicationtoimproveclinicalhandovers
AT barachpaul evaluationofapredevelopmentservicedeliveryinterventionanapplicationtoimproveclinicalhandovers
AT chiltonpeterj evaluationofapredevelopmentservicedeliveryinterventionanapplicationtoimproveclinicalhandovers
AT lilfordrichardj evaluationofapredevelopmentservicedeliveryinterventionanapplicationtoimproveclinicalhandovers
AT evaluationofapredevelopmentservicedeliveryinterventionanapplicationtoimproveclinicalhandovers