地方经济评价:什么是地方经济评价?它的价值是什么?可持续发展吗?

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Pub Date : 2023-11-18 DOI:10.1007/s40258-023-00847-z
Jonathan Karnon, Andrew Partington, Jodi Gray, Aubyn Pincombe, Timothy Schultz
{"title":"地方经济评价:什么是地方经济评价?它的价值是什么?可持续发展吗?","authors":"Jonathan Karnon,&nbsp;Andrew Partington,&nbsp;Jodi Gray,&nbsp;Aubyn Pincombe,&nbsp;Timothy Schultz","doi":"10.1007/s40258-023-00847-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In Australia, local health services with allocated budgets manage public hospital services for defined geographical areas. The authors were embedded in a local health service for around 2 years and undertook a range of local level economic evaluations for which three decision contexts were defined: intervention development, post-implementation and prioritisation. Despite difficulties in estimating opportunity costs and in the relevance of portfolio-based prioritisation approaches, economic evaluation added value to local decision-making. Development-focused (ex ante) economic evaluations used expert elicitation and calibration methods to synthesise published evidence with local health systems data to evaluate interventions to prevent hospital acquired complications. The use of economic evaluation facilitated the implementation of interventions with additional resource requirements. Decision analytic models were used alongside the implementation of larger scale, more complex service interventions to estimate counterfactual patient pathways, costs and outcomes, providing a transparent alternative to the statistical analyses of intervention effects, which were subject to high risk of bias. Economic evaluations of more established services had less impact due to data limitations and lesser executive interest. Prioritisation-focused economic evaluations compared costs, outcomes and processes of care for defined patient populations across alternative local health services to identify, understand and quantify the effects of unwarranted variation to inform priority areas for improvement within individual local health services. The sustained use of local level economic evaluation could be supported by embedding health economists in local continuous improvement units, perhaps with an initial focus on supporting the development and evaluation of prioritised new service interventions. Shared resources and critical mass are important, which could be facilitated through groups of embedded economists with joint appointments between different local health services and the same academic institution.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8065,"journal":{"name":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","volume":"22 3","pages":"273 - 281"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Local Level Economic Evaluation: What is it? What is its Value? Is it Sustainable?\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan Karnon,&nbsp;Andrew Partington,&nbsp;Jodi Gray,&nbsp;Aubyn Pincombe,&nbsp;Timothy Schultz\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40258-023-00847-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>In Australia, local health services with allocated budgets manage public hospital services for defined geographical areas. The authors were embedded in a local health service for around 2 years and undertook a range of local level economic evaluations for which three decision contexts were defined: intervention development, post-implementation and prioritisation. Despite difficulties in estimating opportunity costs and in the relevance of portfolio-based prioritisation approaches, economic evaluation added value to local decision-making. Development-focused (ex ante) economic evaluations used expert elicitation and calibration methods to synthesise published evidence with local health systems data to evaluate interventions to prevent hospital acquired complications. The use of economic evaluation facilitated the implementation of interventions with additional resource requirements. Decision analytic models were used alongside the implementation of larger scale, more complex service interventions to estimate counterfactual patient pathways, costs and outcomes, providing a transparent alternative to the statistical analyses of intervention effects, which were subject to high risk of bias. Economic evaluations of more established services had less impact due to data limitations and lesser executive interest. Prioritisation-focused economic evaluations compared costs, outcomes and processes of care for defined patient populations across alternative local health services to identify, understand and quantify the effects of unwarranted variation to inform priority areas for improvement within individual local health services. The sustained use of local level economic evaluation could be supported by embedding health economists in local continuous improvement units, perhaps with an initial focus on supporting the development and evaluation of prioritised new service interventions. Shared resources and critical mass are important, which could be facilitated through groups of embedded economists with joint appointments between different local health services and the same academic institution.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8065,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy\",\"volume\":\"22 3\",\"pages\":\"273 - 281\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40258-023-00847-z\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40258-023-00847-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在澳大利亚,有分配预算的地方卫生服务部门管理特定地理区域的公立医院服务。作者在当地卫生服务部门工作了大约2年,并进行了一系列地方一级的经济评估,其中定义了三种决策背景:干预发展、实施后和优先排序。尽管在估计机会成本和基于投资组合的优先排序方法的相关性方面存在困难,但经济评估为地方决策增加了价值。以发展为重点的(事前)经济评价使用专家启发和校准方法,将已发表的证据与当地卫生系统数据综合起来,以评估预防医院获得性并发症的干预措施。经济评价的使用促进了需要额外资源的干预措施的执行。决策分析模型与更大规模、更复杂的服务干预的实施一起使用,以估计反事实的患者途径、成本和结果,为干预效果的统计分析提供透明的替代方案,这些分析存在较高的偏差风险。由于数据限制和执行兴趣较低,对较成熟服务的经济评估影响较小。以优先次序为重点的经济评估比较了不同地方卫生服务中特定患者群体的成本、结果和护理过程,以识别、理解和量化不合理变化的影响,从而为个别地方卫生服务中需要优先改进的领域提供信息。将卫生经济学家纳入地方持续改进单位,可以支持持续使用地方一级的经济评价,也许最初的重点是支持开发和评价优先的新服务干预措施。共享资源和临界质量很重要,这可以通过由不同地方卫生服务机构和同一学术机构共同任命的嵌入式经济学家小组来促进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Local Level Economic Evaluation: What is it? What is its Value? Is it Sustainable?

In Australia, local health services with allocated budgets manage public hospital services for defined geographical areas. The authors were embedded in a local health service for around 2 years and undertook a range of local level economic evaluations for which three decision contexts were defined: intervention development, post-implementation and prioritisation. Despite difficulties in estimating opportunity costs and in the relevance of portfolio-based prioritisation approaches, economic evaluation added value to local decision-making. Development-focused (ex ante) economic evaluations used expert elicitation and calibration methods to synthesise published evidence with local health systems data to evaluate interventions to prevent hospital acquired complications. The use of economic evaluation facilitated the implementation of interventions with additional resource requirements. Decision analytic models were used alongside the implementation of larger scale, more complex service interventions to estimate counterfactual patient pathways, costs and outcomes, providing a transparent alternative to the statistical analyses of intervention effects, which were subject to high risk of bias. Economic evaluations of more established services had less impact due to data limitations and lesser executive interest. Prioritisation-focused economic evaluations compared costs, outcomes and processes of care for defined patient populations across alternative local health services to identify, understand and quantify the effects of unwarranted variation to inform priority areas for improvement within individual local health services. The sustained use of local level economic evaluation could be supported by embedding health economists in local continuous improvement units, perhaps with an initial focus on supporting the development and evaluation of prioritised new service interventions. Shared resources and critical mass are important, which could be facilitated through groups of embedded economists with joint appointments between different local health services and the same academic institution.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy provides timely publication of cutting-edge research and expert opinion from this increasingly important field, making it a vital resource for payers, providers and researchers alike. The journal includes high quality economic research and reviews of all aspects of healthcare from various perspectives and countries, designed to communicate the latest applied information in health economics and health policy. While emphasis is placed on information with practical applications, a strong basis of underlying scientific rigor is maintained.
期刊最新文献
Cost-Effective and Sustainable Drug Use in Hospitals: A Systematic and Practice-Based Approach. Quality-Adjusted Life Expectancy Norms Based on the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 for China. Value is Gendered: The Need for Sex and Gender Considerations in Health Economic Evaluations. Assessing the Direct Impact of Death on Discrete Choice Experiment Utilities. Acknowledgement to Referees.
×
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:481959085
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