Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Is Economic Evaluation and Care Commissioning Focused on Achieving the Same Outcomes? Resource-Allocation Considerations and Challenges Using England as a Case Study.
Franklin, Matthew; Hinde, Sebastian; Hunter, Rachael Maree; Richardson, Gerry; Whittaker, William.
Afiliação
  • Franklin M; Sheffield Centre for Health and Related Research (SCHARR), Division of Population Health, School of Medicine and Population Health, The University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK. matt.franklin@sheffield.ac.uk.
  • Hinde S; Centre for Health Economics (CHE), University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
  • Hunter RM; Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, Royal Free Medical School, University College London, Royal Free Campus, Rowland Hill Street, London, NW3 2PF, UK.
  • Richardson G; Centre for Health Economics (CHE), University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
  • Whittaker W; Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, Alliance Manchester Business School, Institute for Health Policy and Organisation, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy ; 22(4): 435-445, 2024 Jul.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38467989
ABSTRACT
Commissioning describes the process of contracting appropriate care services to address pre-identified needs through pre-agreed payment structures. Outcomes-based commissioning (i.e., paying services for pre-agreed outcomes) shares a common goal with economic evaluation achieving value for money for relevant outcomes (e.g., health) achieved from a finite budget. We describe considerations and challenges as to the practical role of relevant outcomes for evaluation and commissioning, seeking to bridge a gap between economic evaluation evidence and care commissioning. We describe conceptual (e.g., what are 'relevant' outcomes) alongside practical considerations (e.g., quantifying and using relevant endpoint or surrogate outcomes) and pertinent issues when linking outcomes to commissioning-based payment mechanisms, using England as a case study. Economic evaluation often focuses on a single endpoint health-focused maximand, e.g., quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), whereas commissioning often focuses on activity-based surrogate outcomes (e.g., health monitoring), as easier-to-measure key performance indicators that are more acceptable (e.g., by clinicians) and amenable to being linked with payment structures. However, payments linked to endpoint and/or surrogate outcomes can lead to market inefficiencies; for example, when surrogates do not have the intended causal effect on endpoint outcomes or when service activity focuses on only people who can achieve prespecified payment-linked outcomes. Accounting for and explaining direct links from commissioners' payment structures to surrogate and then endpoint economic outcomes is a vital step to bridging a gap between economic evaluation approaches and commissioning. Decision-analytic models could aid this but they must be designed to account for relevant surrogate and endpoint outcomes, the payments assigned to such outcomes, and their interaction with the system commissioners purport to influence.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Medicina Estatal Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Appl Health Econ Health Policy Assunto da revista: SAUDE PUBLICA / SERVICOS DE SAUDE Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Medicina Estatal Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Appl Health Econ Health Policy Assunto da revista: SAUDE PUBLICA / SERVICOS DE SAUDE Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article