Development of an instrument (Cost-IS) to estimate costs of implementation strategies for digital health solutions: a modified e-Delphi study.

IF 13.4 1区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Implementation Science Pub Date : 2025-03-07 DOI:10.1186/s13012-025-01423-w
Thomasina Donovan, Bridget Abell, Steven M McPhail, Hannah E Carter
{"title":"Development of an instrument (Cost-IS) to estimate costs of implementation strategies for digital health solutions: a modified e-Delphi study.","authors":"Thomasina Donovan, Bridget Abell, Steven M McPhail, Hannah E Carter","doi":"10.1186/s13012-025-01423-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>It is important to determine the relative value of health innovations when allocating limited healthcare resources. Implementation strategies require and consume healthcare resources yet are often excluded from published economic evaluations. This paper reports on the development of a pragmatic implementation costing instrument to assist with the planning, delivery, and evaluation of digital health implementation strategies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A modified e-Delphi process was adopted to develop an implementation costing instrument. Purposive sampling was used to recruit a panel of experts in implementation science, health economic evaluations and/or digital health from the academic, government, clinical or health service sectors. In each round, participants were sent an electronic questionnaire and a prototype of the implementation costing instrument. The prototype in the initial round was informed from a literature review and qualitative interview findings. The prototype was updated iteratively between rounds in response to the panel's feedback. In subsequent rounds, participants also received the anonymous results of items that did not reach consensus in the previous round. Termination occurred once consensus was reached on integral questions (those pertaining specifically to the instrument design) or when three rounds were completed, to prevent sample fatigue. Consensus was defined as at least 75% of experts in agreement for any item.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Consensus was reached on the core components and design of the instrument from a panel of twelve experts in implementation science, health economic evaluations and/or digital health. Areas where consensus was not reached included users' level of implementation science knowledge, specificity of the tool to digital health and accessibility via digital formats.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Cost-IS is a pragmatic data collection instrument designed to estimate the costs of implementation strategies for digital health solutions. Further piloting of Cost-IS is required to establish its feasibility and generalisability.</p>","PeriodicalId":54995,"journal":{"name":"Implementation Science","volume":"20 1","pages":"13"},"PeriodicalIF":13.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11889902/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-025-01423-w","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: It is important to determine the relative value of health innovations when allocating limited healthcare resources. Implementation strategies require and consume healthcare resources yet are often excluded from published economic evaluations. This paper reports on the development of a pragmatic implementation costing instrument to assist with the planning, delivery, and evaluation of digital health implementation strategies.

Methods: A modified e-Delphi process was adopted to develop an implementation costing instrument. Purposive sampling was used to recruit a panel of experts in implementation science, health economic evaluations and/or digital health from the academic, government, clinical or health service sectors. In each round, participants were sent an electronic questionnaire and a prototype of the implementation costing instrument. The prototype in the initial round was informed from a literature review and qualitative interview findings. The prototype was updated iteratively between rounds in response to the panel's feedback. In subsequent rounds, participants also received the anonymous results of items that did not reach consensus in the previous round. Termination occurred once consensus was reached on integral questions (those pertaining specifically to the instrument design) or when three rounds were completed, to prevent sample fatigue. Consensus was defined as at least 75% of experts in agreement for any item.

Results: Consensus was reached on the core components and design of the instrument from a panel of twelve experts in implementation science, health economic evaluations and/or digital health. Areas where consensus was not reached included users' level of implementation science knowledge, specificity of the tool to digital health and accessibility via digital formats.

Conclusions: Cost-IS is a pragmatic data collection instrument designed to estimate the costs of implementation strategies for digital health solutions. Further piloting of Cost-IS is required to establish its feasibility and generalisability.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
开发一种工具(Cost-IS)来估计数字卫生解决方案实施战略的成本:一项修改的e-Delphi研究。
背景:在分配有限的医疗资源时,确定卫生创新的相对价值是很重要的。实施战略需要并消耗医疗资源,但往往被排除在公布的经济评估之外。本文报告了一种实用的实施成本计算工具的开发,以协助数字卫生实施战略的规划、交付和评估。方法:采用改进的e-Delphi法开发实施成本核算工具。有目的抽样用于从学术、政府、临床或卫生服务部门招募实施科学、卫生经济评估和/或数字卫生方面的专家小组。在每一轮中,向参与者发送一份电子调查表和一份执行成本计算工具的原型。第一轮的原型是通过文献回顾和定性访谈结果得出的。根据小组的反馈,原型在两轮之间进行了迭代更新。在随后的几轮中,参与者还收到了在前一轮中未达成共识的项目的匿名结果。一旦在整体问题(与仪器设计有关的问题)上达成共识,或在完成三轮测试时终止,以防止样品疲劳。共识被定义为至少75%的专家同意任何项目。结果:由实施科学、卫生经济评估和/或数字卫生方面的12名专家组成的小组就该工具的核心组成部分和设计达成了共识。未达成共识的领域包括用户的实施科学知识水平、数字卫生工具的特殊性以及通过数字格式的可及性。结论:成本信息系统是一种实用的数据收集工具,旨在估计数字卫生解决方案实施战略的成本。需要进一步试验成本-信息系统,以确定其可行性和普遍性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Implementation Science
Implementation Science 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
14.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
78
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Implementation Science is a leading journal committed to disseminating evidence on methods for integrating research findings into routine healthcare practice and policy. It offers a multidisciplinary platform for studying implementation strategies, encompassing their development, outcomes, economics, processes, and associated factors. The journal prioritizes rigorous studies and innovative, theory-based approaches, covering implementation science across various healthcare services and settings.
期刊最新文献
Implementation impact in the age of complexity: walking the tightrope between scientific rigour and real‑world pragmatism - Proceedings of the 2025 European Implementation Event. Study protocol for coaching and leadership in autism support settings: a cluster randomized controlled hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial. Monitoring systems for public health program and policy implementation in community settings: features and suggested actions from a scoping review. Comparing two strategies to support the implementation of evidence-based practices for substance use disorders in VA's permanent supportive housing program: a protocol for a type 3 hybrid cluster-randomized controlled trial. Ready to screen implementation trial protocol: a cluster randomized implementation trial comparing a bundled implementation strategy versus a simple implementation strategy to improve intention to screen in the Australian National Lung Cancer Screening Program.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1