Priority setting in medical technology and medical practice assessment
- PMID: 2117223
- DOI: 10.1097/00005650-199008000-00004
Priority setting in medical technology and medical practice assessment
Erratum in
-
Correction and update on 'priority setting in medical technology assessment'.Med Care. 1992 Aug;30(8):744-51. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199208000-00006. Med Care. 1992. PMID: 1640769 No abstract available.
Abstract
This study seeks to assist in setting priorities for assessing medical practices and technologies when assessment resources are scarce. It develops an objective index of expected gain from technology assessment, using modified DRG-level data on hospitalizations in NY State. The index uses standard economic concepts to combine measures of resource use, the coefficient of variation in use rates across regions, and the rate at which the incremental value of a medical intervention changes as its rate of use changes, providing a dollar-valued welfare loss from variations. For the entire US in 1987, the highest index occurred for coronary artery bypass graft ($0.95 billion per year), but most of the high-index interventions were nonsurgical, including hospitalizations for psychosis ($0.74 billion per year), cardiac catheterization ($0.62 billion per year), chronic obstructive lung disease ($0.55 billion per year), angina pectoris ($0.46 billion per year), adult gastroenteritis ($0.38 billion per year), adult pneumonia ($0.32 billion per year) and medical back problems ($0.28 billion per year). The top 25 interventions create an annual welfare loss of exceeding $7 billion. The present value of convincingly assessing the correct way to use these interventions sums many years of annual gains from eliminating these welfare losses. The gains from eliminating unexplained variation in medical practices appear greatly larger than costs of necessary studies.
Similar articles
-
Variations in resource utilization among medical specialties and systems of care. Results from the medical outcomes study.JAMA. 1992 Mar 25;267(12):1624-30. JAMA. 1992. PMID: 1542172
-
Comparison of the appropriateness of coronary angiography and coronary artery bypass graft surgery between Canada and New York State.JAMA. 1994 Sep 28;272(12):934-40. JAMA. 1994. PMID: 8084060
-
Use of standardized patients to assess between-physician variations in resource utilization.JAMA. 1997 Oct 8;278(14):1164-8. JAMA. 1997. PMID: 9326476
-
Interventional pain management at crossroads: the perfect storm brewing for a new decade of challenges.Pain Physician. 2010 Mar-Apr;13(2):E111-40. Pain Physician. 2010. PMID: 20309388 Review.
-
Economic costs of diabetes in the U.S. In 2007.Diabetes Care. 2008 Mar;31(3):596-615. doi: 10.2337/dc08-9017. Diabetes Care. 2008. PMID: 18308683 Review.
Cited by
-
Variability in prescription drug utilization: issues for research.CMAJ. 1996 Mar 1;154(5):635-40. CMAJ. 1996. PMID: 8603319 Free PMC article.
-
Quantitative benefit-harm assessment for setting research priorities: the example of roflumilast for patients with COPD.BMC Med. 2015 Jul 2;13:157. doi: 10.1186/s12916-015-0398-0. BMC Med. 2015. PMID: 26137986 Free PMC article.
-
The economic consequences of practice style variation in providing medical interventions: A systematic review of the literature.J Educ Health Promot. 2019 Jun 27;8:119. doi: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_386_18. eCollection 2019. J Educ Health Promot. 2019. PMID: 31334271 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Value of Information: A Tool to Improve Research Prioritization and Reduce Waste.PLoS Med. 2015 Sep 29;12(9):e1001882. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001882. eCollection 2015 Sep. PLoS Med. 2015. PMID: 26418866 Free PMC article.
-
Patterns of use of the bone mineral density test in Ontario, 1992-1998.CMAJ. 2000 Oct 31;163(9):1139-43. CMAJ. 2000. PMID: 11079058 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources