New Mexico Community Health Councils: Documenting Contributions to Systems Changes.

CONTEXT: Coalition research has shifted from delineating structures and processes to identifying intermediate, systems changes (e.g., changes in policies) that contribute to longterm community health improvement. OBJECTIVE: The University of New Mexico, the New Mexico Department of Health, and community health councils entered a multiyear participatory evaluation process to answer: What actions did health councils take that led to improving health through intermediate, systems changes? DESIGN: The evaluation system was created over several phases through an iterative, participatory process. Data were collected for councils' health priority areas (e.g., substance abuse) from 2009 to 2011. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three community health councils participated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intermediate systems changes were measured: 1) networking and partnering, 2) joint planning of strategies, programs, and services, 3) leveraging resources, and 4) policy initiatives. RESULTS: Health councils reported data for each intermediate outcome by health priority area. Data showed councils identified local public health priorities and addressed those priorities through strengthening networks and partnerships, which lead to the creation and enhancement of strategies, services, and programs. Data also showed councils influenced policies in several ways (e.g., developing policy, identifying new policy, or sponsoring informational forums). Additionally, data showed councils leveraged $1.10 for every dollar invested by the state. When funding was suspended in July 2010, data showed dramatic decreases in activity levels from 2010 to 2011. CONCLUSIONS: The data demonstrate the feasibility and utility of an Internet-based system designed to gather intermediate systems changes evaluation data. This process is a model for similar efforts to capture common outcomes across diverse coalitions and partnerships.

The cost effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: results from the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial (MADIT)-II.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the cost implications of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), using utilization, cost, and survival data from the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial (MADIT)-II. BACKGROUND: This trial showed that prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator reduces the rate of mortality in patients who experienced a previous myocardial infarction and low left ventricular ejection fraction. Given the size of the eligible population, the cost effectiveness of the ICD has substantial implications. METHODS: Our research comprises the cost-effectiveness component of the randomized controlled trial, MADIT-II, based on utilization, cost, and survival information from 1,095 U.S. patients who were assigned randomly to receive an ICD or conventional medical care. Utilization data were converted to costs using a variety of national and hospital-specific data. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (iCER) was calculated as the difference in discounted costs divided by the difference in discounted life expectancy within 3.5 years. Secondary analyses included projections of survival (using three alternative assumptions), corresponding cost assumptions, and the resulting cost-effectiveness ratios until 12 years after randomization. RESULTS: During the 3.5-year period of the study, the average survival gain for the defibrillator arm was 0.167 years (2 months), the additional costs were 39,200 dollars, and the iCER was 235,000 dollars per year-of-life saved. In three alternative projections to 12 years, this ratio ranged from 78,600 dollars to 114,000 dollars. CONCLUSIONS: The estimated cost per life-year saved by the ICD in the MADIT-II study is relatively high at 3.5 years but is projected to be substantially lower over the course of longer time horizons.