The World-Markal Model and Its Application to Cost-Effectiveness, Permit Sharing, and Cost-Benefit Analyses

2005 ◽  
pp. 111-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amit Kanudia ◽  
Maryse Labriet ◽  
Richard Loulou ◽  
Kathleen Vaillancourt ◽  
Jean-Philippe Waaub
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The World

Avalanche Hazard Mitigation Strategies Assessed by Cost Effectiveness Analyses and Cost Benefit Analyses—evidence from Davos, Switzerland

2006 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sven Fuchs ◽  
Magdalena Thöni ◽  
Maria Christina McAlpin ◽  
Urs Gruber ◽  
Michael Bründl
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Hazard Mitigation ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Avalanche Hazard

Yamuna Action Plan-III: Impact on Water Quality of River Yamuna, India

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Ankit Srivastava ◽  
Prathna T.C.
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Treatment Plant ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Holistic Approach ◽  
Pollutant Load ◽  
River Ganges ◽  
The World ◽  
River Yamuna ◽  
The Impact

Water is indispensable to sustain life and livelihood, and rivers serve as major reservoirs of water in manyparts of the world. River Yamuna is the major tributary of the River Ganges in India and is considered to be among the most polluted rivers of the world. The Yamuna Action Plan (YAP) is one of the largest river restoration projects in India and is initiated to clean the river. YAP is a bilateral arrangement between the governments of India and Japan, and consists of three Actions Plans-I, II and III. YAP-III is currently under execution with some of the major projects being the construction of the new Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) at Okhla, rehabilitation and upgrading of WWTPs at Kondli and Rithala in the Delhi region. The impact of YAP-III with regard to these major projects on the reduction of the pollutant load reaching the river and cost-benefit has been evaluated in the current study. Findings from the study indicated that major projects such as construction of a new WWTP at Okhla (124 MGD) can effectively reduce the pollutant load by 283 kg/MGD of wastewater at a cost of Rs. 1161 crores while the rehabilitation project at Rithala (Phase I) can reduce the pollutant load by 92.5 kg/MGD wastewater at a cost of Rs. 300 crores. The present study indicates the need to evaluate projects in terms of cost-benefit analysis in addition to the economic and environmental evaluation for effective action. A holistic approach towards treatment of pollutant load in the river and prevention of further pollutants from reaching the river is required in addition to community awareness and participation for sustainable river water management.

Application of Cost-Benefit and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Clinical Practice

1982 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 235-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Lyle Bootman ◽  
William F. McGhan ◽  
Stephen W. Schondelmeyer
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis

Abstract T P309: Cost Effectiveness for Intra-arterial Stroke Therapy Achieved with Image-based Selection and not with Type of Device

Stroke ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brenda Reese ◽  
Scott Young ◽  
Kevin Stands ◽  
William Hicks ◽  
Jenniffer Mejilla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Patient Selection ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life Year ◽  
Stroke Therapy ◽  
Entire Cohort ◽  
Good Outcome ◽  
Procedure Cost ◽  
The Individual

Background: Our aim was to determine if stentriever treatment results in cost effectiveness over Merci thrombectomy and to identify a cost-effective imaging threshold for intra-arterial treatment selection. Methods: With institutional approval, we retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing intra-arterial stroke therapy from March 2011 to March 2013 at our center. We collected the following data: stroke score, occlusion site, baseline Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS), device used, reperfusion, hemorrhage, 90-day modified Rankin Score (mRS), and procedure cost. Using published criteria, a quality-adjusted life year (QUALY) value of 0.74 and 0.4 was ascribed to a mRS outcome 2 respectively. Using the procedural mean cost, we calculated an incremental cost efficiency ratio (ICER) for stentriever versus Merci embolectomy and for interventions done for a baseline ASPECTS above and below the following thresholds: > 6, > 7, > 8, and > 9. Using established criteria, we identified a cost effective patient selection if the ICER was positive and less than $50,000/QUALY. Results: Our cohort included 122 patients, 45 treated with Merci in the first year and 78 with stentrievers in year two. Reperfusion occurred in 79% (87% in the stentriever and 64% with Merci groups, p=0.002). The good outcome rate for the entire cohort was 40% (43% good outcomes in the stentriever and 33% in the Merci groups, p=0.21) respectively. Stentriever interventions were not cost effective compared to Merci embolectomy (ICER > $500,000/QUALY). Using baseline ASPECTS > 6 and > 7 as a selection criteria for intervention, the good outcome rate was 42% and 44% respectively but with a negative ICER due to higher costs in treating those with lower scores. For those with an ASPECTS > 8 and > 9, the good outcome rate was 44% and 54% with an ICER of $40,000/QUALY and $24,000/QUALY respectively. Conclusions: At our institution, despite better outcome and reperfusion rates, stentriever interventions are yet to show a cost benefit. Optimizing patient selection by using the ASPECTS scoring system has led to improved clinical outcomes and cost effectiveness. Further prospective study may validate this technique for greater value to the individual patient and the health system at large.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document