Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Stockholm 3 Testing Compared to PSA as the Primary Blood Test in the Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Pathway: A Decision Tree Approach.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of using Stockholm 3 (STHLM3) testing compared to the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test in the diagnostic pathway for prostate cancer. METHODS: We created a decision tree model for PSA (current standard) and STHLM3 (new alternative). Cost effectiveness was evaluated in a hypothetical cohort of male individuals aged 50-69 years. The study applied a Danish hospital perspective with a time frame restricted to the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway, beginning with the initial PSA/STHLM3 test, and ending with biopsy and histopathological diagnosis. Estimated values from the decision-analytical model were used to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the base-case analysis. RESULTS: The model-based analysis revealed that STHLM3 testing was more effective than the PSA, but also more costly, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €511.7 (95% credible interval, 359.9-674.3) for each additional correctly classified individual. In the deterministic sensitivity analysis, variations in the cost of STHLM3 had the greatest influence on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, all iterations were positioned in the north-east quadrant of the incremental cost-effectiveness scatterplot. At a willingness to pay of €700 for an additional correctly classified individual, STHLM3 had a 100% probability of being cost effective. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the PSA test as the initial testing modality in the prostate cancer diagnostic workup, STHLM3 testing showed improved incremental effectiveness, however, at additional costs. The results were sensitive to the cost of the STHLM3 test; therefore, a lower cost of the STHLM3 test would improve its cost effectiveness compared with PSA tests.

Implementation of integrated operating rooms: how much time is saved and how do medical staff experience the upgrading? A mixed methods study in Denmark.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate staff experiences of the implementation and use of integrated operating rooms (IORs) in comparison to conventional operating rooms (CORs) in Denmark. DESIGN: This study used a mixed methods approach by combining quantitative (registry-based analysis of surgical time) and qualitative (interviews with experienced surgical staff) perspectives. SETTING: Hospitals in Denmark. METHODS: The quantitative component compared the time consumption of patients between the integrated and CORs in two hospital departments at Aarhus University Hospital. Data were extracted from the administrative system in the hospital. Independent t-tests were used to estimate the statistical differences in the mean time spent on patients between the two operating rooms (ORs), and linear regression was applied to adjust for the potential influence of the surgeon. The explorative qualitative research component involved interviews with 20 informants from 10 hospital departments across seven Danish hospitals, all of whom participated between February and April 2019. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The quantitative analyses showed that preparation time for lobectomy was significantly lower and completion time for cholecystectomy significantly higher in the integrated compared with CORs. No other statistically significant differences were found. The qualitative analysis showed that some nurses experienced better cooperation with the surgeon and that non-sterile nurses experienced an improved working environment in the integrated compared with CORs. Surgical staff experienced that the IORs led to improved workflow during surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified no disadvantages regarding the use of IORs compared with CORs. The quantitative component of the research did not identify convincing statistically significant differences in the time consumption per patient between the ORs and according to the qualitative analyses IORs were not experienced by study participants to lead to major improvements among staff.

Cost-utility analysis of learning and coping versus standard education in cardiac rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial with 3 years of follow-up.

Objectives: To enhance adherence to cardiac rehabilitation (CR), a patient education programme called 'learning and coping' (LC-programme) was implemented in three hospitals in Denmark. The aim of this study was to investigate the cost-utility of the LC-programme compared with the standard CR-programme. Methods: 825 patients with ischaemic heart disease or heart failure were randomised to the LC-programme or the standard CR-programme and were followed for 3 years.A societal cost perspective was applied and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) were based on SF-6D measurements. Multiple imputation technique was used to handle missing data on the SF-6D. The statistical analyses were based on means and bootstrapped SEs. Regression framework was employed to estimate the net benefit and to illustrate cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results: No statistically significant differences were found between the two programmes in total societal costs (4353 Euros; 95% CI -3828 to 12 533) or in QALY (-0.006; 95% CI -0.053 to 0.042). At a threshold of 40 000 Euros, the LC-programme was found to be cost-effective at 15% probability; however, for patients with heart failure, due to increased cost savings, the probability of cost-effectiveness increased to 91%. Conclusions: While the LC-programme did not appear to be cost-effective in CR, important heterogeneity was noted for subgroups of patients. The LC-programme was demonstrated to increase adherence to the rehabilitation programme and to be cost-effective among patients with heart failure. However, further research is needed to study the dynamic value of heterogeneity due to the small sample size in this subgroup.

Women's Preferences for Birthing Hospital in Denmark: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

BACKGROUND: Free choice of hospital has been introduced in many healthcare systems to accommodate patient preferences and incentivize hospitals to compete; however, little is known about what patients actually prefer. OBJECTIVES: This study assessed women's preferences for birthing hospital in Denmark by quantifying the utility and trade-offs of hospital attributes. METHODS: We conducted a discrete-choice experiment survey with 12 hypothetical scenarios in which women had to choose between three hospitals characterized by five attributes: continuity of midwifery care, availability of a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), hospital services offered, level of specialization to handle rare events, and travel time. A random parameter logit model was used to estimate the utility and marginal willingness to travel (WTT) for improvements in other hospital attributes. RESULTS: A total of 517 women completed the survey. Significant preferences were expressed for all attributes (p < 0.01), with the availability of a NICU being the most important driver of women's preferences; women were willing to travel 30 more minutes (95% confidence interval 28-32) to reach a hospital with a highly specialized NICU. The subgroup analyses revealed differences in WTT, with substantial heterogeneity due to prior experience with giving birth and regarding risk attitude and health literacy. CONCLUSION: A high specialization level was the most influential factor for women without previous birth experience and for risk-averse individuals but not for women with a high health literacy score. Hence, more information about the woman's risk profile and services required could play a role in affecting hospital choice.

Does free choice of hospital conflict with equity of access to highly specialized hospitals? A case study from the Danish health care system.

Equity of access to health care is a central objective of European health care systems. In this study, we examined whether free choice of hospital, which has been introduced in many systems to strengthen user rights and improve hospital competition, conflicts with equity of access to highly specialized hospitals. We chose to carry out a study on 134,049 women who had uncomplicated pregnancies from 2005 to 2014 in Denmark because of their homogeneity in terms of need, the availability of behavioral data, and their expected engagement in choice of hospital. Multivariate logistic regression was used to link the dependent variable of bypassing the nearest non-highly specialized public hospital in order to "up-specialize", with independent variables related to socioeconomic status, risk attitude, and choice premises, using administrative registries. Overall, 16,426 (12%) women were observed to bypass the nearest hospital to up-specialize. Notably, high education level was significantly associated with up-specialization, with an odds ratio of 1.50 (95% CI: 1.40-1.60, p < 0.001) compared to low education group. This confirms our hypothesis that there is a socioeconomic gradient in terms of exercising the right to a free choice of hospital, and so the results indicate that the policy exacerbates inequity of access to health care.

Pregnant women's choice of birthing hospital: A qualitative study on individuals' preferences.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate pregnant women's decision making in relation to their choice of birthing hospital and, in particular, their priorities regarding hospital characteristics. METHODS: The focus of this study was the choice of birthing hospital among pregnant women. A qualitative interview design was used and women were recruited during their first pregnancy-related visit to a general practitioner. The interviews were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide, and a thematic analysis of the data was carried out. RESULTS: Women made their hospital choice decision independently and they relied extensively on their own or peers' experiences. Travel distance played a role, but some women were willing to incur longer travel times to give birth at a specialized hospital in order to try to reduce the risks (in case of unexpected events). The women associated the presence of specialized services and staff that were more qualified and experienced with increased safety. Other priorities included continuity of care (i.e., being seen by the same midwife) as well as service availability, which in this case referred to the possibility of a water birth and postnatal hoteling services. CONCLUSIONS: The choice of hospital provider appears to be strongly influenced by experience, whether personal experience or the experience of peers. However, there appears to be room for more information to be provided on safety and service attributes as an instrument for making an informed decision.