Measuring cost-effectiveness of secondary health care:: Feasibility and potential utilization of results

被引:15
作者
Räsänen, P
Sintonen, H
Ryynänen, OP
Blom, M
Semberg-Konttinen, V
Roine, RP
机构
[1] Grp Adm, Helsinki 00029, Finland
[2] Uusimaa Hosp Grp, Helsinki, Finland
[3] Univ Helsinki, Dept Publ Hlth, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland
[4] Univ Kuopio, Dept Hlth Policy & Management, FIN-70211 Kuopio, Finland
[5] Acad Finland, Helsinki 00531, Finland
关键词
quality of life; quality-adjusted life years; cost-effectiveness; treatment outcome;
D O I
10.1017/S0266462305050038
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: Whether cost-effectiveness of secondary health care can be measured in a simple, yet commensurate way was studied. Methods: Approximately 4,900 patients' health-related quality of life scores before and after treatment were measured. Used were a combination of quality of life data with diagnostic and financial indicators routinely collected in the hospital. Results: Seventy percent of patients returned the first questionnaire and the informed written consent to participate. Of these patients, 80 percent also returned the second questionnaire sent out 3 to 12 months after treatment, depending on clinical specialty and diagnostic category. The routine of sending out questionnaires could be automated in such a way that data collection required only a limited amount of extra work. Patients were generally satisfied with the fact that the hospital was interested in their well-being also after treatment. No physician offered the chance to participate refused data collection in the patient group he or she was responsible for. The attitudes of the nursing staff were generally positive toward data collection, although it caused some extra work for some of them. The possibility of relating already routinely collected financial performance indicators with a relevant measure of treatment effectiveness, opened prospects for refined analysis of cost-effectiveness of secondary health care. Conclusions: Routine collection of health-related quality of life data as an indicator of treatment effectiveness is feasible, requires only a small amount of extra work, and is potentially very useful when combined with existing measures of hospital performance.
引用
收藏
页码:22 / 31
页数:10
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]  
BLOMLANGE M, 1998, 19 NORD HLTH EC STUD, P1
[2]  
Drummond M., 2015, METHODS EC EVALUATIO, V4
[3]  
Gold MR, 1996, COST EFFECTIVENESS H
[4]   A comparison of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) with four other generic utility instruments [J].
Hawthorne, G ;
Richardson, J ;
Day, NA .
ANNALS OF MEDICINE, 2001, 33 (05) :358-370
[5]  
KAUPPINEN R, 1999, COST EFFECTIVENESS I
[6]   A comparative review of four preference-weighted measures of health-related quality of life [J].
Kopec, JA ;
Willison, KD .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2003, 56 (04) :317-325
[7]   National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments [J].
Rawlins, MD ;
Culyer, AJ .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2004, 329 (7459) :224-227
[8]   The 15D instrument of health-related quality of life: properties and applications [J].
Sintonen, H .
ANNALS OF MEDICINE, 2001, 33 (05) :328-336
[9]  
Sintonen H., 1995, 42 NAT CTR HLTH PROG
[10]  
SINTONEN H, 1996, KOHTI ENSI VUOSITUHA, V205, P32