Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Health economics and causal modelling in Health Services Research

451 views

Published on

Presentation given by Dr Yen-Fu and Dr Sam Watson at the CLAHRC WM Programme Steering Committee meeting on 15th April 2015

Published in: Healthcare
  • Be the first to comment

Health economics and causal modelling in Health Services Research

  1. 1. Health economics and causal modelling in health services research 23/04/2015 Yen-Fu Chen & Sam Watson Warwick Centre for Applied Health Research & Delivery (W-CAHRD) CLAHRC WM Programme Steering Committee Meeting, 15 April 2015
  2. 2. Challenges in economic evaluation of health services research • Clinical outcomes: too rare to measure reliably, e.g. transfusion of incompatible blood e.g. a £10 million computer system for a hospital with 50,000 admissions/year only needs to save 2 lives per 1000 patients • Process outcomes: too diffuse to measure • Experimental evidence may be scarce • Cost effectiveness =  Costs /  Effects • Difficulties in measuring intervention effects Lilford et al. BMJ 2010; 341:c4413
  3. 3. Use of causal modelling • Overcomes difficulties in measuring specific processes or outcomes • Allows the integration of all available evidence • Three key steps: 1.Build qualitative causal model 2.Populate the model o Systematic review of quantitative data o Elicitation of expert belief 3.Estimate intervention effectiveness using Bayesian approach
  4. 4. Service delivery causal chain Process Generic service intervention Targeted service intervention Policy intervention Clinical intervention Structure Generic process Outcome Targeted process Clinical process Context (moderating variables) HTA Explanatory (independent) variables Dependent variables Intervening variables
  5. 5. Consultant presence at weekendsStructure Intervening variables / mechanisms Higher level of clinical competence Stronger leadership in case management Process Outcome More accurate diagnosis Earlier intervention Higher throughput (shorter waiting time & procedural delay, quicker discharge & shorter length of stay) Better Monitoring Better administration of intervention Better patient satisfaction Reduced errors & adverse events Enhanced learning for junior doctors Faster decision on palliative cases Reduced mortality
  6. 6. Consultant presence (at weekends)Structure Intervening variables / mechanisms Higher level of clinical competence Process Outcome Prompt investigation & more accurate diagnosis Earlier intervention Higher throughput (waiting time; procedural delay; length of stay) Better Monitoring Better administration of intervention Better patient satisfaction Reduced errors & adverse events Enhanced learning for junior doctors Faster decision on palliative cases Reduced mortality Stronger leadership in case management
  7. 7. Causal modelling • Three key steps: - Build qualitative causal model - Populate the model o Systematic review of quantitative data Quality, quantity, relevance, heterogeneity o Elicitation of expert belief - Estimate intervention effectiveness using Bayesian approach • Over to Sam
  8. 8. Fielding et al. 2013 (Clin Med 13;344-8) • Consultant delivered care (n=260) vs. standard care (n=150) • 16 weeks • Length of stay (median): 4 days vs 7 days • 30-day readmission: 17% vs 14% • In-hospital mortality: 3% vs 6%

×