• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • The Christie Research Publications Repository
    • All Christie Publications
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • The Christie Research Publications Repository
    • All Christie Publications
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of ChristieCommunitiesTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsThis CollectionTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Local Links

    The Christie WebsiteChristie Library and Knowledge Service

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    How to cost the implementation of major system change for economic evaluations: case study using reconfigurations of specialist cancer surgery in part of London, England

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    34009523.pdf
    Size:
    2.785Mb
    Format:
    PDF
    Description:
    From UNPAYWALL
    Download
    Authors
    Clarke, C. S.
    Vindrola-Padros, C.
    Levermore, C.
    Ramsay, A. I. G.
    Black, G. B.
    Pritchard-Jones, K.
    Hines, J.
    Smith, G.
    Bex, A.
    Mughal, M.
    Shackley, David C
    Melnychuk, M.
    Morris, S.
    Fulop, N. J
    Hunter, R. M.
    Show allShow less
    Affiliation
    Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.
    Issue Date
    2021
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Background: Studies have been published regarding the impact of major system change (MSC) on care quality and outcomes, but few evaluate implementation costs or include them in cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). This is despite large potential costs of MSC: change planning, purchasing or repurposing assets, and staff time. Implementation costs can influence implementation decisions. We describe our framework and principles for costing MSC implementation and illustrate them using a case study. Methods: We outlined MSC implementation stages and identified components, using a framework conceived during our work on MSC in stroke services. We present a case study of MSC of specialist surgery services for prostate, bladder, renal and oesophagogastric cancers, focusing on North Central and North East London and West Essex. Health economists collaborated with qualitative researchers, clinicians and managers, identifying key reconfiguration stages and expenditures. Data sources (n = approximately 100) included meeting minutes, interviews, and business cases. National Health Service (NHS) finance and service managers and clinicians were consulted. Using bottom-up costing, items were identified, and unit costs based on salaries, asset costs and consultancy fees assigned. Itemised costs were adjusted and summed. Results: Cost components included options appraisal, bidding process, external review; stakeholder engagement events; planning/monitoring boards/meetings; and making the change: new assets, facilities, posts. Other considerations included hospital tariff changes; costs to patients; patient population; and lifetime of changes. Using the framework facilitated data identification and collection. The total adjusted implementation cost was estimated at £7.2 million, broken down as replacing robots (£4.0 million), consultancy fees (£1.9 million), staff time costs (£1.1 million) and other costs (£0.2 million). Conclusions: These principles can be used by funders, service providers and commissioners planning MSC and researchers evaluating MSC. Health economists should be involved early, alongside qualitative and health-service colleagues, as retrospective capture risks information loss. These analyses are challenging; many cost factors are difficult to identify, access and measure, and assumptions regarding lifetime of the changes are important. Including implementation costs in CEA might make MSC appear less cost effective, influencing future decisions. Future work will incorporate this implementation cost into the full CEAs of the London Cancer MSC.
    Citation
    Clarke CS, Vindrola-Padros C, Levermore C, Ramsay AIG, Black GB, Pritchard-Jones K, et al. How to Cost the Implementation of Major System Change for Economic Evaluations: Case Study Using Reconfigurations of Specialist Cancer Surgery in Part of London, England. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2021 May 19;
    Journal
    Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10541/624093
    DOI
    10.1007/s40258-021-00660-6
    PubMed ID
    34009523
    Additional Links
    https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40258-021-00660-6
    Type
    Article
    Language
    en
    ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
    10.1007/s40258-021-00660-6
    Scopus Count
    Collections
    All Christie Publications

    entitlement

    Related articles

    • Authors: Fulop NJ, Ramsay AIG, Hunter RM, McKevitt C, Perry C, Turner SJ, Boaden R, Papachristou I, Rudd AG, Tyrrell PJ, Wolfe CDA, Morris S
    • Issue date: 2019 Feb
    • Cost-Utility Analysis of Major System Change in Specialist Cancer Surgery in London, England, Using Linked Patient-Level Electronic Health Records and Difference-in-Differences Analysis.
    • Authors: Clarke CS, Melnychuk M, Ramsay AIG, Vindrola-Padros C, Levermore C, Barod R, Bex A, Hines J, Mughal MM, Pritchard-Jones K, Tran M, Shackley DC, Morris S, Fulop NJ, Hunter RM
    • Issue date: 2022 Nov
    • The potential role of cost-utility analysis in the decision to implement major system change in acute stroke services in metropolitan areas in England.
    • Authors: Hunter RM, Fulop NJ, Boaden RJ, McKevitt C, Perry C, Ramsay AIG, Rudd AG, Turner SJ, Tyrrell PJ, Wolfe CDA, Morris S
    • Issue date: 2018 Mar 14
    • The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
    • Authors: Soll RF, Ovelman C, McGuire W
    • Issue date: 2020 Nov
    • A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of topotecan for ovarian cancer.
    • Authors: Forbes C, Shirran L, Bagnall AM, Duffy S, ter Riet G
    • Issue date: 2001
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.