Cargando…
Key actors’ perspectives on cost-effectiveness analysis in Uganda: a cross-sectional survey
BACKGROUND: Cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a useful tool for allocation of constrained resources, yet CEA methodologies are rarely taught or implemented in developing nations. We aimed to assess exposure to, and interest in CEA, and identify barriers to implementation in Uganda. METHODS: A cro...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4232642/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25363234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-014-0539-8 |
_version_ | 1782344605635706880 |
---|---|
author | Musuuza, Jackson S Singer, Mendel E Mandalakas, Anna M Katamba, Achilles |
author_facet | Musuuza, Jackson S Singer, Mendel E Mandalakas, Anna M Katamba, Achilles |
author_sort | Musuuza, Jackson S |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a useful tool for allocation of constrained resources, yet CEA methodologies are rarely taught or implemented in developing nations. We aimed to assess exposure to, and interest in CEA, and identify barriers to implementation in Uganda. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was carried out in Uganda using a newly developed self-administered questionnaire (via online and paper based approaches), targeting the main health care actors as identified by a previous study. RESULTS: Overall, there was a 68% response rate, with a 92% (69/75) response rate among the paper-based respondents compared to a 40% (26/65) rate with the online respondents. Seventy eight percent (74/95) of the respondents had no exposure to CEA. None of those with a master of medicine degree had any CEA exposure, and 80% of technical officers, who are directly involved in policy formulation, had no CEA exposure. Barriers to CEA identified by more than 50% of the participants were: lack of information technology (IT) infrastructure (hardware and software); lack of local experts in the field of CEA; lack of or limited local data; limited CEA training in schools; equity or ethical issues; and lack of training grants incorporating CEA. 93% reported a lot of interest in learning to conduct CEA, and over 95% felt CEA was important for clinical decision making and policy formulation. CONCLUSIONS: Among health care actors in Uganda, there is very limited exposure to, but substantial interest in conducting CEA and including it in clinical decision making and health care policy formation. Capacity to undertake CEA needs to be built through incorporation into medical training and use of regional approaches. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4232642 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-42326422014-11-16 Key actors’ perspectives on cost-effectiveness analysis in Uganda: a cross-sectional survey Musuuza, Jackson S Singer, Mendel E Mandalakas, Anna M Katamba, Achilles BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a useful tool for allocation of constrained resources, yet CEA methodologies are rarely taught or implemented in developing nations. We aimed to assess exposure to, and interest in CEA, and identify barriers to implementation in Uganda. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was carried out in Uganda using a newly developed self-administered questionnaire (via online and paper based approaches), targeting the main health care actors as identified by a previous study. RESULTS: Overall, there was a 68% response rate, with a 92% (69/75) response rate among the paper-based respondents compared to a 40% (26/65) rate with the online respondents. Seventy eight percent (74/95) of the respondents had no exposure to CEA. None of those with a master of medicine degree had any CEA exposure, and 80% of technical officers, who are directly involved in policy formulation, had no CEA exposure. Barriers to CEA identified by more than 50% of the participants were: lack of information technology (IT) infrastructure (hardware and software); lack of local experts in the field of CEA; lack of or limited local data; limited CEA training in schools; equity or ethical issues; and lack of training grants incorporating CEA. 93% reported a lot of interest in learning to conduct CEA, and over 95% felt CEA was important for clinical decision making and policy formulation. CONCLUSIONS: Among health care actors in Uganda, there is very limited exposure to, but substantial interest in conducting CEA and including it in clinical decision making and health care policy formation. Capacity to undertake CEA needs to be built through incorporation into medical training and use of regional approaches. BioMed Central 2014-11-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4232642/ /pubmed/25363234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-014-0539-8 Text en © Musuuza et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 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 credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Musuuza, Jackson S Singer, Mendel E Mandalakas, Anna M Katamba, Achilles Key actors’ perspectives on cost-effectiveness analysis in Uganda: a cross-sectional survey |
title | Key actors’ perspectives on cost-effectiveness analysis in Uganda: a cross-sectional survey |
title_full | Key actors’ perspectives on cost-effectiveness analysis in Uganda: a cross-sectional survey |
title_fullStr | Key actors’ perspectives on cost-effectiveness analysis in Uganda: a cross-sectional survey |
title_full_unstemmed | Key actors’ perspectives on cost-effectiveness analysis in Uganda: a cross-sectional survey |
title_short | Key actors’ perspectives on cost-effectiveness analysis in Uganda: a cross-sectional survey |
title_sort | key actors’ perspectives on cost-effectiveness analysis in uganda: a cross-sectional survey |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4232642/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25363234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-014-0539-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT musuuzajacksons keyactorsperspectivesoncosteffectivenessanalysisinugandaacrosssectionalsurvey AT singermendele keyactorsperspectivesoncosteffectivenessanalysisinugandaacrosssectionalsurvey AT mandalakasannam keyactorsperspectivesoncosteffectivenessanalysisinugandaacrosssectionalsurvey AT katambaachilles keyactorsperspectivesoncosteffectivenessanalysisinugandaacrosssectionalsurvey |