Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Jan;16(1):97-104.
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2010.02637.x. Epub 2010 Oct 19.

Viewpoint: Economic evaluation of package of care interventions employing clinical guidelines

Affiliations

Viewpoint: Economic evaluation of package of care interventions employing clinical guidelines

Edwine W Barasa et al. Trop Med Int Health. 2011 Jan.

Abstract

Increasingly attention is shifting towards delivering essential packages of care, often based on clinical practice guidelines, as a means to improve maternal, child and newborn survival in low-income settings. Cost effectiveness analysis (CEA), allied to the evaluation of less complex intervention, has become an increasingly important tool for priority setting. Arguably such analyses should be extended to inform decisions around the deployment of more complex interventions. In the discussion, we illustrate some of the challenges facing the extension of CEA to this area. We suggest that there are both practical and methodological challenges to overcome when conducting economic evaluation for packages of care interventions that incorporate clinical guidelines. Some might be overcome by developing specific guidance on approaches, for example clarity in identifying relevant costs. Some require consensus on methods. The greatest challenge, however, lies in how to incorporate, as measures of effectiveness, process measures of service quality. Questions on which measures to use, how multiple measures might be combined, how improvements in one area might be compared with those in another and what value is associated with improvement in health worker practices are yet to be answered.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Framework for economic evaluation (Adapted from Freemantle et al. 1999).

References

    1. Adam T, Bichai D, Khan M, Evans D. Methods for the Costing Component of the Multi-Country Evaluation of IMCI. WHO; Geneva, Switzerland: 2004.
    1. Amaral J, Gouws E, Bryce J, Leite AJ, Cunha AL, Victora CG. Effect of Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) on health worker performance in Northeast-Brazil. Cadernos de saúde pública. 2004;20(Suppl. 2):S209–S219. - PubMed
    1. Anand S, Hanson K. Disability-adjusted life years: a critical review. Journal of Health Economics. 1997;16:685–702. - PubMed
    1. Arifeen SE, Hoque DM, Akter T, et al. Effect of the Integrated Management of Childhood Illness strategy on childhood mortality and nutrition in a rural area in Bangladesh: a cluster randomised trial. Lancet. 2009;374:393–403. - PubMed
    1. Baltussen R, Brouwer W, Niessen L. Cost-effectiveness analysis for priority setting in health: penny-wise but pound-foolish. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2005;21:532–534. - PubMed

Publication types