scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of a physician-nurse supplementary triage assessment team at an academic tertiary care emergency department

CJEM ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 191-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivy Cheng ◽  
Maaret Castren ◽  
Alex Kiss ◽  
Merrick Zwarenstein ◽  
Mats Brommels ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Additional Patient ◽  
Patient Volume ◽  
Benefit Ratio ◽  
Cost Benefit Ratio ◽  
The Cost

ABSTRACTObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of physician-nurse supplementary triage assistance team (MDRNSTAT) from a hospital and patient perspective.MethodsThis was a cost-effectiveness evaluation of a cluster randomized control trial comparing the MDRNSTAT with nurse-only triage in the emergency department (ED) between the hours of 0800 and 1500. Cost was MDRNSTAT salary. Revenue was from Ontario’s Pay-for-Results and patient volume-case mix payment programs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was based on MDRNSTAT cost and three consequence assessments: 1) per additional patient-seen; 2) per physician initial assessment (PIA) hour saved; and 3) per ED length of stay (EDLOS) hour saved. Patient opportunity cost was determined. Patient satisfaction was quantified by a cost-benefit ratio. A sensitivity analysis extrapolating MDRNSTAT to different working hours, salary, and willingness-to-pay data was performed.ResultsThe added cost of the MDRNSTAT was $3,597.27 [$1,729.47 to ∞] per additional patient-seen, $75.37 [$67.99 to $105.30] per PIA hour saved, and $112.99 [$74.68 to $251.43] per EDLOS hour saved. From the hospital perspective, the cost-benefit ratio was 38.6 [19.0 to ∞] and net present value of –$447,996 [–$435,646 to –$459,900]. For patients, the cost-benefit ratio for satisfaction was 2.8 [2.3 to 4.6]. If MDRNSTAT performance were consistently implemented from noon to midnight, it would be more cost-effective.ConclusionsThe MDRNSTAT is not a cost-effective daytime strategy but appears to be more feasible during time periods with higher patient volume, such as late morning to evening.

scholarly journals Estimation of cost-effectiveness of poplar wood production in poplar plantations in Ravni Srem based on the cost-benefit method

2011 ◽  
pp. 81-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ljiljana Keca
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Discount Rate ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Wood Production ◽  
Benefit Ratio ◽  
Cost Benefit Ratio ◽  
Poplar Plantations ◽  
Economic Analyses ◽  
The Cost

Cost-effectiveness of polar cultivation was analyzed based on one of the indicators for the assessment of agriculture and forestry projects - cost-benefit (r). Poplar plantations of the clone I-214 of different rotations and on different soil types were analyzed in the area of Ravni Srem. The aim of the study was to evaluate the justification of the invested financial means in wood production in poplar plantations, based on the analysis of costs and receipts at different plantation ages, using the cost-benefit method. It was found that in all 13 analyzed compartments, the average cost-benefit ratio was 0.36. This means that the costs at the discount rate of 12% are about 2.8 times higher than the receipts. Accordingly, it can be asserted that it is economically unjustified to invest in the projected stands, but only in the case when the value of social capital accounts for 12%. Based on the analysis of sensitivity of the cost-benefit method, it was concluded that cost benefit ratio for p=8-12% was below 1 within the study range of costs and receipts changes, while for p=4-6% this ratio was above 1 in some cases of decrease in costs, i.e. increase in receipts. It was noted that the change in r depending on the change in costs, developed by the exponential function, and the change in r depending on the change in receipts developed by the linear function. Also, it was concluded that at the lower discount rates, the values of r moved towards 1, so for 8% r=0.71, and for 6% r=0.94. The value at the discount rate of 4% indicates that the project is cost-effective and that the invested ? 1 makes ? 1.22. This fact is especially important when poplar cultivation projects are ranked. For this reason, this method is used for the evaluation of social benefits, i.e. for economic analyses. It is almost never applied in the analysis of private investments.

scholarly journals Economic Evaluation of a School-based Combined Program with a Targeted Pit and Fissure Sealant and Fluoride Mouth Rinse in Japan

2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 230-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shihoko Sakuma ◽  
Akihiro Yoshihara ◽  
Hideo Miyazaki ◽  
Seigo Kobayashi
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Mouth Rinse ◽  
Benefit Ratio ◽  
Fissure Sealant ◽  
Program Cost ◽  
School Based ◽  
Cost Benefit Ratio ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Cost

Background: In Niigata prefecture, Japan, a system has been developed based on a school-based fluoride mouth rinse program as follows; students with caries susceptible teeth are screened in a school dental examination, and encouraged to receive sealant placement in local dental clinics. However, the cost-effectiveness of sealant application in the public health has been questioned. The aim of this study was to estimate of the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit ratio for a school-based combined program with fluoride mouth rinse and targeted fissure sealant in children residing in non-fluoridated areas in Japan. Participants: The analysis was based on comparing an intervention group with two cohorts in the 8-year-old (n=66) and 11-year-old (n=58) participating in the combined program for four and seven years, respectively, with a control group of the same grades (n=43 and n=54 respectively). Methods: The study measured mean differences in number of decayed and filled teeth (DFT) between the study groups and a combined program cost per child during study periods. The cost-effectiveness ratio was expressed as an individual annual program cost per DFT averted. In the cost-benefit ratio the mean difference in treatment cost between groups (program benefit) was compared to program cost. Results: The mean reduced DFT differences between groups were 1.44 in 8-year-old and 3.17 in 11-year-old children. The cost-effectiveness ratio was ¥ 493 in the 8-year-old and ¥ 202 in the 11-year-old, respectively. The cost-benefit ratio was 1.84 in 8-year-old children and 2.42 in 11-year-old. Conclusion: This combined program indicated acceptable cost-effectiveness and cost –benefit ratio.

scholarly journals Why Some Firms Train Apprentices and Many Others Do Not

2006 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 249-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan C. Wolter ◽  
Jürg Schweri ◽  
Samuel Mühlemann
Keyword(s):  
Labour Market ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Training System ◽  
Benefit Ratio ◽  
Apprenticeship Training ◽  
Effective Training ◽  
Market Situation ◽  
Cost Benefit Ratio ◽  
The Cost

Abstract The latest study investigating the cost-benefit ratio of apprenticeship training for Swiss companies has shown that most apprentices offset the cost of their training during their apprenticeship on the basis of the productive contribution of the work they perform. Given this outcome, it is worth investigating why so many firms choose not to train apprentices. Maximum-likelihood selection models were used to estimate the net cost of training for firms without an apprenticeship programme. The models show, firstly, that non-training firms would incur significantly higher net cost during the apprenticeship period if they would switch to a training policy and, secondly, that this less favourable cost-benefit ratio is determined less by cost than by absence of benefit. For the apprenticeship system as such the results indicate that, as long as training regulations and the market situation permit a cost-effective training of apprentices, companies do not need specific labour market regulations or institutions to offer training posts. In this respect, the Swiss findings might be of interest for the ongoing German discussion about the expected repercussions of a more general labour market deregulation on the apprenticeship training system.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness and feasibility of conditional economic incentives and motivational interviewing to improve HIV health outcomes of adolescents living with HIV in Anambra State, Nigeria

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Obinna Ikechukwu Ekwunife ◽  
Chinelo Janefrances Ofomata ◽  
Charles Ebuka Okafor ◽  
Maureen Ugonwa Anetoh ◽  
Stephen Okorafor Kalu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Viral Load ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Service Delivery ◽  
Motivational Interviewing ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Economic Incentives ◽  
Additional Patient ◽  
Incentive Scheme ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background In sub-Saharan Africa, there is increasing mortality and morbidity of adolescents due to poor linkage, retention in HIV care and adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART). This is a result of limited adolescent-centred service delivery interventions. This cost-effectiveness and feasibility study were piggybacked on a cluster-randomized trial that assessed the impact of an adolescent-centred service delivery intervention. The service delivery intervention examined the impact of an incentive scheme consisting of conditional economic incentives and motivational interviewing on the health outcomes of adolescents living with HIV in Nigeria. Method A cost-effectiveness analysis from the healthcare provider’s perspective was performed to assess the cost per additional patient achieving undetected viral load through the proposed intervention. The cost-effectiveness of the incentive scheme over routine care was estimated using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as cost/patient who achieved an undetectable viral load. We performed a univariate sensitivity analysis to examine the effect of key parameters on the ICER. An in-depth interview was conducted on the healthcare personnel in the intervention arm to explore the feasibility of implementing the service delivery intervention in HIV treatment hospitals in Nigeria. Result The ICER of the Incentive Scheme intervention compared to routine care was US$1419 per additional patient with undetectable viral load. Going by the cost-effectiveness threshold of US$1137 per quality-adjusted life-years suggested by Woods et al., 2016, the intervention was not cost-effective. The sensitivity test showed that the intervention will be cost-effective if the frequency of CD4 count and viral load tests are reduced from quarterly to triannually. Healthcare professionals reported that patients’ acceptance of the intervention was very high. Conclusion The conditional economic incentives and motivational interviewing was not cost-effective, but can become cost-effective if the frequency of HIV quality of life indicator tests are performed 1–3 times per annum. Patients’ acceptance of the intervention was very high. However, healthcare professionals believed that sustaining the intervention may be difficult unless factors such as government commitment and healthcare provider diligence are duly addressed. Trial registration This trial is registered in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry through the WHO International Registry Network (PACTR201806003040425).

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of Initial Revision Digit Amputation Performed in the Emergency Department Versus the Operating Room

Hand ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 208-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph A. Gil ◽  
Avi D. Goodman ◽  
Andrew P. Harris ◽  
Neill Y. Li ◽  
Arnold-Peter C. Weiss
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Operating Room ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Initial Management ◽  
Fingertip Amputation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Initial Procedure ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Threshold

Background: The objective of this study was to determine the comparative cost-effectiveness of performing initial revision finger amputation in the emergency department (ED) versus in the operating room (OR) accounting for need for unplanned secondary revision in the OR. Methods: We retrospectively examined patients presenting to the ED with traumatic finger and thumb amputations from January 2010 to December 2015. Only those treated with primarily revision amputation were included. Following initial management, the need for unplanned reoperation was assessed and associated with setting of initial management. A sensitivity analysis was used to determine the cost-effectiveness threshold for initial management in the ED versus the OR. Results: Five hundred thirty-seven patients had 677 fingertip amputations, of whom 91 digits were initially primarily revised in the OR, and 586 digits were primarily revised in the ED. Following initial revision, 91 digits required unplanned secondary revision. The unplanned secondary revision rates were similar between settings: 13.7% digits from the ED and 12.1% of digits from the OR ( P = .57). When accounting for direct costs, an incidence of unplanned revision above 77.0% after initial revision fingertip amputation in the ED would make initial revision fingertip amputation in the OR cost-effective. Therefore, based on the unplanned secondary revision rate, initial management in the ED is more cost-effective than in the OR. Conclusions: There is no significant difference in the incidence of unplanned/secondary revision of fingertip amputation rate after the initial procedure was performed in the ED versus the OR.

Home Visitation Investment

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 89 (1) ◽  
pp. 169-169
Author(s):  
NORMAN J. SISSMAN
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Home Visits ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Home Visitation ◽  
Benefit Ratio ◽  
Health Care Resources ◽  
Detailed Consideration ◽  
Cost Benefit Ratio ◽  
Women And Children ◽  
The Cost

To the Editor.— Two recent reviews in Pediatrics1,2 provide much interesting information on the effect of home visits on the health of women and children. However, I was disappointed not to find in either article more than token reference to the cost of the programs reviewed. In this day of increasingly scarce health care resources, we no longer have the luxury of evaluating programs such as these without detailed consideration of their cost-benefit ratio.

scholarly journals Ultrasound scan as a potential source of nosocomial and cross-infection: a literature review

2015 ◽  
Vol 48 (5) ◽  
pp. 319-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
André Hadyme Miyague ◽  
Fernando Marum Mauad ◽  
Wellington de Paula Martins ◽  
Augusto César Garcia Benedetti ◽  
Ana Elizabeth Gomes de Melo Tavares Ferreira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cross Infection ◽  
Ultrasound Scan ◽  
Benefit Ratio ◽  
Source Of Infection ◽  
Potential Source ◽  
Cost Benefit Ratio ◽  
The Cost

AbstractThe authors review the main concepts regarding the importance of cleaning/disinfection of ultrasonography probes, aiming a better comprehension by practitioners and thus enabling strategies to establish a safe practice without compromising the quality of the examination and the operator productivity. In the context of biosafety, it is imperative to assume that contact with blood or body fluids represents a potential source of infection. Thus, in order to implement cleaning/disinfection practice, it is necessary to understand the principles of infection control, to consider the cost/benefit ratio of the measures to be implemented, and most importantly, to comprehend that such measures will not only benefit the health professional and the patient, but the society as a whole.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of a Problem-Solving Intervention Aimed to Prevent Sickness Absence among Employees with Common Mental Disorders or Occupational Stress

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (14) ◽  
pp. 5234
Author(s):  
Marijke Keus Van De Poll ◽  
Gunnar Bergström ◽  
Irene Jensen ◽  
Lotta Nybergh ◽  
Lydia Kwak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Sickness Absence ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Production Loss ◽  
The Cost

The cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness of a work-directed intervention implemented by the occupational health service (OHS) for employees with common mental disorders (CMD) or stress related problems at work were investigated. The economic evaluation was conducted in a two-armed clustered RCT. Employees received either a problem-solving based intervention (PSI; n = 41) or care as usual (CAU; n = 59). Both were work-directed interventions. Data regarding sickness absence and production loss at work was gathered during a one-year follow-up. Bootstrap techniques were used to conduct a Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) and a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) from both an employer and societal perspective. Intervention costs were lower for PSI than CAU. Costs for long-term sickness absence were higher for CAU, whereas costs for short-term sickness absence and production loss at work were higher for PSI. Mainly due to these costs, PSI was not cost-effective from the employer’s perspective. However, PSI was cost-beneficial from a societal perspective. CEA showed that a one-day reduction of long-term sickness absence costed on average €101 for PSI, a cost that primarily was borne by the employer. PSI reduced the socio-economic burden compared to CAU and could be recommended to policy makers. However, reduced long-term sickness absence, i.e., increased work attendance, was accompanied by employees perceiving higher levels of production loss at work and thus increased the cost for employers. This partly explains why an effective intervention was not cost-effective from the employer’s perspective. Hence, additional adjustments and/or support at the workplace might be needed for reducing the loss of production at work.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document