Calculating the social impact of home automation for people with disability: A social return on investment study.

INTRODUCTION: Home automation can deliver important outcomes for people with disabilities, including enhanced independence. Despite the millions of dollars spent on home automation in Australia and other developed nations, to date, there has been no economic evaluation of this type of assistive technology. METHOD: A social return on investment analysis of home automation study was undertaken. Primary data were collected using qualitative interviews with home automation consumers and other key stakeholders, including occupational therapists, a spinal rehabilitation physician, peer support advocate, and managers and technical personnel from home automation providers (n = 17). The analysis was supported by (1) secondary data from a scoping review on outcomes from home automation and (2) additional literature searches to identify suitable financial proxies and to make estimates of the proportion of home automation users expected to experience each outcome. A scenario approach was used with three home automation scenarios developed with increasing complexity and costs to calculate the social return on investment. RESULTS: Eight outcomes from the use of home automation were identified, including reduced reliance on carers and family members, increased independence, and improved energy and comfort. The social return on investment ranged from $38.80 (low cost) to $15.10 (high cost) for every $1 invested across a 10-year benefit period, with the financial proxy for reduced care attendant hours contributing the most to the social return ratio. Even the highest cost scenario was repaid in social value within the first year of the benefit period. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that home automation represents a sound investment and has a significant impact on the overall quality of life of people with disabilities. Focusing on the financial savings in care attendant hours alone should be compelling evidence for funders to recognise home automation's value and continue to fund this assistive technology. CONSUMER AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: A consumer representative was a member of the project steering group, which supported the research team at all stages of the project. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: When people get injured, their disability can stop them doing things around the home that they used to be able to do. Technology can help people with disabilities do things like open and close doors and turn off taps by pressing a button, so they do not have to wait for someone to help them. This technology can be expensive, but no one has looked at if it is worth the money. We spoke to some people with disabilities who used this type of technology, and they told us their lives were better now they used this technology. For example, they told us they were able to do things for themselves, they did not need carers as much, and they had better mental health. We spoke to businesses about the costs of different types of technology that can be used in the home. We then put a dollar value on the ways people with disabilities told us their lives were better. For example, for better mental health, we worked out how much it would cost to see a psychologist for 1 year. We found that the dollar value of the ways in which people with disabilities' lives were improved was at least 15 times more than the costs of the technology. This study therefore shows that this technology is worth the money and improves the lives of people with disabilities following serious injury.

Evaluating Health and Well-Being Returns on Investment in a Cancer Biobank.

Objectives: To evaluate the population health returns from investment in the Victorian Cancer Biobank (VCB), a research consortium including five hospital-integrated sample repositories located in Melbourne, Australia. Methods: This economic evaluation assigned monetary values to the health gains attributable to VCB-supported research. These were then compared with the total investment in VCB infrastructure since inception (2006-2022) to determine the return on investment (ROI). A time lag of 40 years was incorporated, recognizing the delay from investment to impact in scientific research. Health gains were therefore measured for the years 2046-2066, with a 3% discount rate applied. Health gains were measured in terms of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) attributable to VCB-associated research, with monetary cost assigned via the standardized value of a statistical life year (AU$227,000). The age-standardized DALY rate attributable to cancer was modeled for two standpoints (1) extrapolating the current decreasing trajectory and (2) assuming nil future improvement from current rates, with 33% of the difference attributed to scientific innovation. The proportion of the aggregate health gain attributable to VCB-supported research was estimated from the number of VCB-credited scientific publications as a proportion of total oncology publications over the same period. Results: The AU$32,628,016 of public funding invested in VCB activities over the years 2006-2022 is projected to generate AU$84,561,373 in total (discounted) savings. ROI was AU$1.59 for each AU$1 invested. Conclusions: The VCB offers a strong ROI in terms of impacts on health, justifying the expenditure of public funds and supporting the use of biobanks to advance scientific research.

Understanding the financial aspects of digital pathology: A dynamic customizable return on investment calculator for informed decision-making.

Background: The adoption of digital pathology has transformed the field of pathology, however, the economic impact and cost analysis of implementing digital pathology solutions remain a critical consideration for institutions to justify. Digital pathology implementation requires a thorough evaluation of associated costs and should identify and optimize resource allocation to facilitate informed decision-making. A dynamic cost calculator to estimate the financial implications of deploying digital pathology systems was needed to estimate the financial effects on transitioning to a digital workflow. Methods: A systematic approach was used to comprehensively assess the various components involved in implementing and maintaining a digital pathology system. This consisted of: (1) identification of key cost categories associated with digital pathology implementation; (2) data collection and analysis of cost estimation; (3) cost categorization and quantification of direct and indirect costs associated with different use cases, allowing customization of each factor based on specific intended uses and market rates, industry standards, and regional variations; (4) opportunities for savings realized by digitization of glass slides and (5) integration of the cost calculator into a unified framework for a holistic view of the financial implications associated with digital pathology implementation. The online tool enables the user to test various scenarios specific to their institution and provides adjustable parameters to assure organization specific relatability. Results: The Digital Pathology Association has developed a web-based calculator as a companion tool to provide an exhaustive list of the necessary concepts needed when assessing the financial implications of transitioning to a digital pathology system. The dynamic return on investment (ROI) calculator successfully integrated relevant cost and cost-saving components associated with digital pathology implementation and maintenance. Considerations include factors such as digital pathology infrastructure, clinical operations, staffing, hardware and software, information technology, archive and retrieval, medical-legal, and potential reimbursements. The ROI calculator developed for digital pathology workflows offers a comprehensive, customizable tool for institutions to assess their anticipated upfront and ongoing annual costs as they start or expand their digital pathology journey. It also offers cost-savings analysis based on specific user case volume, institutional geographic considerations, and actual costs. In addition, the calculator also serves as a tool to estimate number of required whole slide scanners, scanner throughput, and data storage (TB). This tool is intended to estimate the potential costs and cost savings resulting from the transition to digital pathology for business plan justifications and return on investment calculations. Conclusions: The digital pathology online cost calculator provides a comprehensive and reliable means of estimating the financial implications associated with implementing and maintaining a digital pathology system. By considering various cost factors and allowing customization based on institution-specific variables, the calculator empowers pathology laboratories, healthcare institutions, and administrators to make informed decisions and optimize resource allocation when adopting or expanding digital pathology technologies. The ROI calculator will enable healthcare institutions to assess the financial feasibility and potential return on investment on adopting digital pathology, facilitating informed decision-making and resource allocation.

Current evidence of the economic value of One Health initiatives: A systematic literature review.

Funding and financing for One Health initiatives at country level remain challenging as investments commonly require demonstrated evidence of economic value or returns. The objectives of this review were to i) identify, critically analyse and summarise quantitative evidence of the net economic value of One Health initiatives; ii) document methodologies commonly used in the scientific literature; and iii) describe common challenges and any evidence gaps. Scientific databases were searched for published literature following the PRISMA guidelines and an online survey and workshop with subject matter experts were used to identify relevant grey literature. Studies were included if they reported on quantitative costs and benefits (monetary and non-monetary) and were measured across at least two sectors. Relevant publications were analysed and plotted against the six action tracks of the Quadripartite One Health Joint Plan of Action to help classify the initiatives. Ninety-seven studies were included. Eighty studies involved only two sectors and 78 reported a positive economic value or return. Of those studies that reported a positive return, 49 did not compare with a sectoral counterfactual, 28 studies demonstrated an added value of using a cross-sectoral approach, and 6 studies demonstrated an added value of One Health communication, collaboration, coordination, and capacity building. Included studies most frequently related to endemic zoonotic, neglected tropical and vector-borne diseases, followed by health of the environment and food safety. However, diversity in economic analysis methodology between studies included resulted in difficulty to compare or combine findings. While there is a growing body of evidence of the value of One Health initiatives, a substantial part of the evidence still focuses on "traditional" One Health topics, particularly zoonoses. Developing a standardised and practical approach for One Health economic evaluation will facilitate assessment of the added value and gather evidence for One Health to be invested in and endorsed by multiple sectors.

Lead with speed: Recasting the forensic laboratory product line and service delivery model.

Forensic laboratories face a multitude of challenges when striving to deliver services to the criminal justice system. While many of these issues change over time, one in particular seems to endure the test of time … the need for faster results. Law enforcement wants and needs quicker response times to access critical information required to investigate their cases. One answer to this persistent problem is evolving technology. Technology not only permits a much quicker response than forensic laboratories are currently delivering, it can open the door to solving previously unsolvable cases. Along with applying new technology, an evaluation of current forensic laboratory product lines, service delivery models, and mindset regarding the role of forensic science-based investigative leads (termed forensic leads) is warranted. Resources and strategic planning are needed to realize the full potential of evolving technologies and what forensic laboratories can do to provide actionable and timely forensic leads to our criminal justice partners as a normal course of action instead of as an exception. This proposal is to establish a permanent, designated Forensic Lead Program (FLP) that resides under the umbrella of an accredited forensic laboratory and is tasked with the development and release of forensic leads. The FLP involves a focused menu of services, defined personnel roles, strict protocols, short turnaround time, standardized expectations, and targeted training, combined with the sense of urgency needed for consistent delivery of timely and actionable forensic leads. A dedicated FLP will save time and money by providing critical information for more focused investigations. 'Speed is the need' … for quick identification of those that threaten public safety and for the equally quick elimination of those wrongfully accused. Programs at two large state forensic laboratories will demonstrate how these concepts could be implemented along with their learning experiences. A business case will also be included to demonstrate the cost benefit of the Forensic Lead Program for DNA (CODIS - Combined DNA Index System) and NIBIN (National Integrated Ballistic Information Network), however other section services are expected to see similar benefits. Improving the response time by one day saves $1677.75 per $1 spent [1]. The return on investment (ROI) for applying DNA to firearms evidence returns $47.88 per $1 spent, or an 4,788 % ROI. Applying NIBIN (National Integrated Ballistic Information Network) to firearms evidence to provide investigative leads is $502.19 per $1 spent, which is a 50,219 % ROI. Recasting the forensic laboratory product line and service delivery model to 'Lead with Speed' makes both economic and investigative sense.

RCT-based Social Return on Investment (SROI) of a Home Exercise Program for People With Early Dementia Comparing In-Person and Blended Delivery Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Regular exercise and community engagement may slow the rate of function loss for people with dementia. However, the evidence is uncertain regarding the cost-effectiveness and social return on investment (SROI) of home exercise with community referral for people with dementia. This study aimed to compare the social value generated from the in-person PrAISED program delivered before March 2020 with a blended PrAISED program delivered after March 2020. SROI methodology compared in-person and blended delivery formats of a home exercise program. Stakeholders were identified, a logic model was developed, outcomes were evidenced and valued, costs were calculated, and SROI ratios were estimated. Five relevant and material outcomes were identified: 3 outcomes for patient participants (fear of falling, health-related quality of life, and social connection); 1 outcome for carer participants (carer strain), and 1 outcome for the National Health Service (NHS) (health service resource use). Data were collected at baseline and at 12-month follow-up. The in-person PrAISED program generated SROI ratios ranging from £0.58 to £2.33 for every £1 invested. In-person PrAISED patient participants gained social value from improved health-related quality of life, social connection, and less fear of falling. In-person PrAISED carer participants acquired social value from less carer strain. The NHS gained benefit from less health care service resource use. However, the blended PrAISED program generated lower SROI ratios ranging from a negative ratio to £0.08:£1. Compared with the blended program, the PrAISED in-person program generated higher SROI ratios for people with early dementia. An in-person PrAISED intervention with community referral is likely to provide better value for money than a blended one with limited community referral, despite the greater costs of the former.Trial registration: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN15320670.

Early economic evaluation of the digital gait analysis system for fall prevention-Preliminary analysis of the GaitSmart system.

Objective: To develop an early economics evaluation (EEE) to assess the cost-effectiveness of the GS in reducing the RoF and FoF. Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) with a return on investment (RoI) estimation was performed. CEA used the most relevant parameters, such as increased gait speed and decreased FoF, to estimate the reduction in the RoF, the impact on health care resources used and financial implications for the National Health System in the United Kingdom. Outcomes were measured as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained based on the reduction of the RoF and FoF. Uncertainties around the main parameters used were evaluated by probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results: The CEA results showed that the GS is a dominant strategy over the standard of care to improve the movements of older persons who have suffered a fall or are afraid of falling (incremental QALYs based on FoF = 0.77 and QALYs based on RoF = 1.07, cost of FoF = -£4479.57 and cost of RoF = -£2901.79). By implementing the GS, the ROI results suggest that every pound invested in the GS could result in cost savings of £1.85/patient based on the RoF reduction and £11.16/patient based on the FoF reduction. The probability of being cost saving based on the number of iterations were 79.4 percent (based on FoF) and 100 percent (based on RoF). Conclusion: The EEE supports the main hypothesis that the GS is an effective intervention to avoid falls and is potentially cost saving.

Economic analysis of a health system strengthening program in the Democratic Republic of the Congo / Analyse économique d'un programme de renforcement du système de santé en République démocratique du Congo.

INTRODUCTION: Due to the Democratic Republic of the Congo's (DRC) precarious health system that provides only limited access to health care, the European Union, via Memisa Belgium, implemented a program to strengthen provision of and access to health care (known as PRO DS) in the provinces of Kongo Central and Ituri. This program took a holistic approach, seeking to improve equitable access and combat malnutrition. METHODS: To measure the program's social return on investment and to estimate the cost per capita and effectiveness per euro invested (efficiency), a 61-month (1 July 2017 to 31 July 2022) cost-effectiveness evaluation with a societal perspective was carried out. The double-difference method was used to compare the results of PRO DS and non-PRO DS zones. The social return on investment was assessed via the ratio of effectiveness to costs. RESULTS: Analyses revealed the program cost between 3.72 and 3.96 euros per capita per year (2022) in Kongo Central, and between 3.12 and 3.36 euros in Ituri. Importantly, it was cost-effective in the areas of reproductive health, nutrition, and the use of health and nutrition services. CONCLUSIONS: The program's strong nutritional component and overall holistic vision may explain why it was so efficient. PRO DS stands out from other programs that focus solely on one specific problem or population. Although the program has some limitations, it would be worthwhile for the government to invest in it.

Introduction: Face à l'accès limité aux soins et à la précarité des structures sanitaires en République démocratique du Congo, l'Union européenne par l'intermédiaire de Memisa Belgique avait mis en œuvre le Programme de renforcement de l'offre et développement de l'accès aux soins de santé (PRO DS) dans les provinces du Kongo-Central et de l'Ituri. Ce programme se caractérisait par une approche holistique d'équité d'accès et de lutte contre la malnutrition. Méthodes: Pour mesurer le retour social sur investissement du programme et estimer son coût par habitant et son efficacité par euros investis (efficience), une évaluation coûts-efficacité avec une perspective sociétale de 61 mois (1er juillet 2017 au 31 juillet 2022) a été réalisée. La méthode de double différence, qui compare les résultats des zones PRO DS et des zones non PRO DS, a été utilisée. Le retour social sur investissement a été évalué par le biais du rapport entre l'efficacité et les coûts. Résultats: Les analyses ont montré que le programme coûtait par année et par habitant entre 3,72 et 3,96 euros (2022) au Kongo-Central, et entre 3,12 et 3,36 euros en Ituri. De plus, il était coût-efficace dans plusieurs domaines, telles la santé de la reproduction, la nutrition, l'utilisation des services de santé et nutritionnels. Conclusions: L'efficience du programme pourrait s'expliquer par sa vision holistique avec un fort volet « Nutrition ¼. PRO DS se démarque d'autres programmes qui agissent uniquement sur une problématique ou population spécifique. Malgré ses quelques imperfections, le gouvernement mériterait d'y investir.

Commentary: Value of information case study strongly supports use of the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC).

A Value of Information (VOI) analysis can play a key role in decision-making for adopting new approach methodologies (NAMs). We applied EPA's recently developed VOI framework to the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC). Obtaining/deriving a TTC value for use as a toxicity reference value (TRV) for substances with limited toxicity data was shown to provide equivalent or greater health protection, immense return on investment (ROI), greater net benefit, and substantially lower costs of delay (CoD) compared with TRVs derived from either traditional human health assessment (THHA) chronic toxicity testing in lab animals or the 5-day in vivo EPA Transcriptomic Assessment Product (ETAP). For all nine exposure scenarios examined, the TTC was more economical terms of CoD and ROI than the ETAP or the THHA; expected net benefit was similar for the TTC and ETAP with both of these more economical than the THHA The TTC ROI was immensely greater (5,000,000-fold on average) than the ROI for THHA and the ETAP ROI (100,000-fold on average). These results support the use of the TTC for substances within its domain of applicability to waive requiring certain in vivo tests, or at a minimum, as an initial screening step before conducting either the ETAP or THHA in vivo studies.

Return on investment of fracture liaison services: a systematic review and analysis.

Fracture liaison services (FLS) have been proven clinically effective and cost-effective in preventing subsequent fractures among patients with an existing fragility fracture. Little is known about their monetary benefits such as their return on investment (ROI). This systematic review aimed to investigate the ROI of FLS and identify the FLS characteristics with better ROI. Studies on the cost-effectiveness of FLS published between January 2000 and December 2022 were searched from MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Central. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection and data extraction. ROI was calculated based on the difference between monetary benefits and FLS costs divided by the FLS costs. Subgroup analysis of ROI was performed across FLS types and FLS design details. A total of 23 FLS were included in this review. The majority of them were targeting patients aged over 50 years having fractures without identified sites. The mean ROI of these FLS was 10.49 (with a median ROI of 7.57), and 86.96% of FLS had positive ROI. FLS making treatment recommendations yielded the highest ROI (with a mean ROI of 18.39 and a median of 13.60). Incorporating primary care providers (with a mean ROI of 16.04 and a median of 13.20) or having them as program leaders (with a mean ROI of 12.07 and a median of 12.07) has demonstrated a high ROI. FLS for specific fracture sites had great monetary return. Intensive FLS such as type A and B FLS programs had higher ROI than non-intensive type C and D FLS. This review revealed a 10.49-fold monetary return of FLS. Identified characteristics contributing to greater economic return informed value-for-money FLS designs. Findings highlight the importance of FLS and the feasibility of expanding their contribution in mitigating the economic burden of osteoporotic fracture and are conducive to the promotion of FLS internationally.