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.

Return on investment in science: twenty years of European Commission funded research in Alzheimer's dementia, breast cancer and prostate cancer.

Alzheimer's disease (AD), breast cancer (BC) and prostate cancer (PC) continue to be high in the research and innovation agenda of the European Commission (EC). This is due to their exceptionally large burden to the national health systems, the profound economic effects of opportunity costs attributable to decreased working ability, premature mortality and the ever-increasing demand for both hospital and home-based medical care. Over the last two decades, the EC has been steadily increasing both the number of proposals being funded and the amounts of financial resources being allocated to these fields of research. This trend has continued throughout four consecutive science funding cycles, namely framework programme (FP)5, FP6, FP7 and Horizon 2020 (H2020). We performed a retrospective assessment of the outputs and outcomes of EC funding in AD, BC and PC research over the 1999-2019 period by means of selected indicators. These indicators were assessed for their ability to screen the past, present and future for an array of causal relationships and long-term trends in clinical, epidemiological and public health sphere, while considering also the broader socioeconomic impact of funded research on the society at large. This analysis shows that public-private partnerships with large industry and university-based consortia have led to some of the most impactful proposals being funded over the analysed time period. New pharmaceuticals, small molecules and monoclonal antibodies alike, along with screening and prevention, have been the most prominent sources of innovation in BC and PC, extending patients' survival and enhancing their quality of life. Unlike oncology, dementia drug development has been way less successful, with only minor improvements related to the quality of supportive medical care for symptoms and more sensitive diagnostics, without any ground-breaking disease-modifying treatment(s). Significant progresses in imaging diagnostics and nanotechnology have been largely driven by the participation of medical device industry multinational companies. Clinical trials funded by the EC were conducted, leading to the development of brand-new drug molecules featuring novel mechanisms of action. Some prominent cases of breakthrough discoveries serve as evidence for the European capability to generate cutting-edge technological innovation in biomedicine. Less productive areas of research may be reconsidered as priorities when shaping the new agenda for forthcoming science funding programmes.

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.

Powerful medical education improves health care quality and return on investment.

INTRODUCTION: Powerful medical education (PME) involves the use of new technologies informed by the science of expertise that are embedded in laboratories and organizations that value evidence-based education and support innovation. This contrasts with traditional medical education that relies on a dated apprenticeship model that yields uneven results. PME involves an amalgam of features, conditions and assumptions, and contextual variables that comprise an approach to developing clinical competence grounded in education impact metrics including efficiency and cost-effectiveness. METHODS: This article is a narrative review based on SANRA criteria and informed by realist review principles. The review addresses the PME model with an emphasis on mastery learning and deliberate practice principles drawn from the new science of expertise. Pub Med, Scopus, and Web of Science search terms include medical education, the science of expertise, mastery learning, translational outcomes, cost effectiveness, and return on investment. Literature coverage is comprehensive with selective citations. RESULTS: PME is described as an integrated set of twelve features embedded in a group of seven conditions and assumptions and four context variables. PME is illustrated via case examples that demonstrate improved ventilator patient management learning outcomes compared to traditional clinical education and mastery learning of breaking bad news communication skills. Evidence also shows that PME of physicians and other health care providers can have translational, downstream effects on patient care practices, patient outcomes, and return on investment. Several translational health care quality improvements that derive from PME include reduced infections; better communication among physicians, patients, and families; exceptional birth outcomes; more effective patient education; and return on investment. CONCLUSIONS: The article concludes with challenges to hospitals, health systems, and medical education organizations that are responsible for producing physicians who are expected to deliver safe, effective, and cost-conscious health care.

Investigations into Economic Returns Resulting from Foliar Fungicides and Application Timing on Management of Tar Spot in Indiana Hybrid Corn.

Tar spot, caused by Phyllachora maydis, is the most significant yield-limiting disease of corn (Zea mays L.) in Indiana. Currently, fungicides are an effective management tool for this disease, and partial returns from their use under different disease severity conditions has not previously been studied. Between 2019 and 2021, two separate field experiments were conducted in each year in Indiana to assess the efficacy of nine foliar fungicide products and nine fungicide application timings based on corn growth stages on tar spot symptoms and stromata, canopy greenness, yield, and influence on partial returns. All fungicides evaluated significantly suppressed tar spot development in the canopy and increased canopy greenness over the nontreated control. Additionally, applications of mefentrifluconazole + pyraclostrobin, metconazole + pyraclostrobin, cyproconazole + picoxystrobin at tassel, and propiconazole + benzovindiflupyr + azoxystrobin between the tassel and dough growth stages were the most effective at significantly reducing disease severity, increasing canopy greenness, protecting yield, and offered the greatest partial return. Fungicide products varied in their ability to protect yield under low and high disease severity conditions relative to the nontreated control. Consistently, positive yield increases were observed when disease severity was high, which translated to greater profitability relative to low severity conditions. On average, the yield increases across foliar fungicide products and timed application treatments were 544.6 and 1,020.7 kg/ha greater, and partial returns using a grain value of $0.17/kg were $92.6/ha and $173.5/ha greater, respectively, when high severity conditions occurred. This research demonstrates that foliar fungicides and appropriately timed fungicide applications can profitably be used to manage tar spot in Indiana under high disease severity conditions.

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.

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.

Economic Evaluation of Wastewater Surveillance Combined with Clinical COVID-19 Screening Tests, Japan.

The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed substantial burdens on the global society. To find an optimal combination of wastewater surveillance and clinical testing for tracking COVID-19, we evaluated the economic efficiency of hypothetical screening options at a single facility in Japan. To conduct cost-benefit analyses, we developed standard decision models in which we assumed model parameters from literature and primary data, such as screening policies used at the Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic Village in 2021. We compared hypothetical 2-step screening options that used clinical PCR to diagnose COVID-19 after a positive result from primary screening using antigen tests (option 1) or wastewater surveillance (option 2). Our simulation results indicated that option 2 likely would be economically more justifiable than option 1, particularly at lower incidence levels. Our findings could help justify and promote the use of wastewater surveillance as a primary screening at a facility level for COVID-19 and other infectious diseases.

Prioritizing species conservation programs based on IUCN Green Status and estimates of cost-sharing potential.

Over 1 million species around the world are at risk of extinction, and conservation organizations have to decide where to invest their limited resources. Cost-effectiveness can be increased by leveraging funding opportunities and increasing collaborative partnerships to achieve shared conservation goals. We devised a structured decision-making framework to prioritize species' conservation programs based on a cost-benefit analysis that takes collaborative opportunities into account in an examination of national and global conservation return on investment. Conservation benefit is determined by modifying the novel International Union for the Conservation of Nature Green Status for Species to provide an efficient, high-level measure that is comparable among species, even with limited information and time constraints. We applied this prioritization approach to the Wilder Institute/Calgary Zoo, Canada, a nonprofit organization seeking to increase the number of species it assists with conservation translocations. We sought to identify and prioritize additional species' programs for which conservation translocation expertise and actions could make the most impact. Estimating the likelihood of cost-sharing potential enabled total program cost to be distinguished from costs specific to the organization. Comparing a benefit-to-cost ratio on different geographic scales allowed decision makers to weigh alternative options for investing in new species' programs in a transparent and effective manner. Our innovative analysis aligns with general conservation planning frameworks and can be adapted for any organization.

Priorización de los programas de conservación de especies con base en el Estatus Verde de la UICN y las estimaciones del potencial del reparto de costos Resumen Hoy en día, las organizaciones de conservación tienen que decidir en dónde invertir sus limitados recursos a la vez que más de un millón de especies están en peligro de extinción a nivel mundial. La rentabilidad de las inversiones puede incrementarse aprovechando las oportunidades de financiación y aumentando las asociaciones de colaboración para alcanzar los objetivos de conservación compartidos. Diseñamos un marco de toma de decisiones para priorizar los programas de conservación de especies con base en un análisis de costo-beneficio que considera las oportunidades de colaboración de un estudio del rendimiento de la inversión en la conservación a escala nacional y mundial. El beneficio de la conservación se determina al modificar el novedoso Estatus Verde de las Especies de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza para proporcionar una medida eficiente y de alto nivel que pueda compararse entre especies, incluso con limitaciones de información y tiempo. Aplicamos esta estrategia de priorización al Instituto Wilder/Zoológico de Calgary (Canadá), una organización sin fines de lucro que pretende aumentar el número de especies a las que ayuda con reubicaciones de conservación. Intentamos identificar y priorizar programas de especies adicionales en los que la experiencia y las acciones de reubicación para la conservación pudieran tener un mayor impacto. La estimación de la probabilidad del potencial de reparto de costos permitió distinguir el costo total del programa de los costos específicos de la organización. La comparación de la relación costo-beneficio a diferentes escalas geográficas permitió a los responsables de la toma de decisiones sopesar las opciones para invertir en nuevos programas de especies de forma transparente y eficaz. Nuestro análisis innovador se ajusta a los marcos generales de planificación de la conservación y puede adaptarse a cualquier organización.

Economic evaluation of a community health worker model for tuberculosis care in Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam: a mixed-methods Social Return on Investment Analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is extensive evidence for the cost-effectiveness of programmatic and additional tuberculosis (TB) interventions, but no studies have employed the social return on investment (SROI) methodology. We conducted a SROI analysis to measure the benefits of a community health worker (CHW) model for active TB case finding and patient-centered care. METHODS: This mixed-method study took place alongside a TB intervention implemented in Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam, between October-2017 - September-2019. The valuation encompassed beneficiary, health system and societal perspectives over a 5-year time-horizon. We conducted a rapid literature review, two focus group discussions and 14 in-depth interviews to identify and validate pertinent stakeholders and material value drivers. We compiled quantitative data from the TB program's and the intervention's surveillance systems, ecological databases, scientific publications, project accounts and 11 beneficiary surveys. We mapped, quantified and monetized value drivers to derive a crude financial benefit, which was adjusted for four counterfactuals. We calculated a SROI based on the net present value (NPV) of benefits and investments using a discounted cash flow model with a discount rate of 3.5%. A scenario analysis assessed SROI at varying discount rates of 0-10%. RESULTS: The mathematical model yielded NPVs of US$235,511 in investments and US$8,497,183 in benefits. This suggested a return of US$36.08 for each dollar invested, ranging from US$31.66-US39.00 for varying discount rate scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluated CHW-based TB intervention generated substantial individual and societal benefits. The SROI methodology may be an alternative for the economic evaluation of healthcare interventions.

Investment case for small and sick newborn care in Tanzania: systematic analyses.

BACKGROUND: Small and sick newborn care (SSNC) is critical for national neonatal mortality reduction targets by 2030. Investment cases could inform implementation planning and enable coordinated resource mobilisation. We outline development of an investment case for Tanzania to estimate additional financing for scaling up SSNC to 80% of districts as part of health sector strategies to meet the country's targets. METHODS: We followed five steps: (1) reviewed national targets, policies and guidelines; (2) modelled potential health benefits by increased coverage of SSNC using the Lives Saved Tool; (3) estimated setup and running costs using the Neonatal Device Planning and Costing Tool, applying two scenarios: (A) all new neonatal units and devices with optimal staffing, and (B) half new and half modifying, upgrading, or adding resources to existing neonatal units; (4) calculated budget impact and return on investment (ROI) and (5) identified potential financing opportunities. RESULTS: Neonatal mortality rate was forecast to fall from 20 to 13 per 1000 live births with scale-up of SSNC, superseding the government 2025 target of 15, and close to the 2030 Sustainable Development Goal 3.2 target of <12. At 85% endline coverage, estimated cumulative lives saved were 36,600 by 2025 and 80,000 by 2030. Total incremental costs were estimated at US$166 million for scenario A (US$112 million set up and US$54 million for running costs) and US$90 million for scenario B (US$65 million setup and US$25 million for running costs). Setup costs were driven by infrastructure (83%) and running costs by human resources (60%). Cost per capita was US$0.93 and the ROI is estimated to be between US$8-12 for every dollar invested. CONCLUSIONS: ROI for SSNC is higher compared to other health investments, noting many deaths averted followed by full lifespan. This is conservative since disability averted is not included. Budget impact analysis estimated a required 2.3% increase in total government health expenditure per capita from US$40.62 in 2020, which is considered affordable, and the government has already allocated additional funding. Our proposed five-step SSNC investment case has potential for other countries wanting to accelerate progress.

How is return on investment from quality improvement programmes conceptualised by mental healthcare leaders and why: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Return on Investment (ROI), whereby the ratio of costs to benefits is assessed, is encouraged in-order to justify the value of Quality Improvement (QI) programmes. We previously performed a literature review to develop a ROI conceptual framework for QI programmes. We concluded that, QI-ROI is conceptualised as any monetary and non-monetary benefit. In the current study, we explored if this finding is shared by mental healthcare leaders. We also investigated the stability of this conceptualisation against influencing factors and potential for disinvestment. METHODS: We performed qualitative interviews with leaders in an NHS mental health organisation. There were 16 participants: nine board members and seven senior leaders. The interviews were held online via Microsoft Teams and lasted an hour on average. We performed deductive-inductive analysis to seek data from our initial ROI framework and any new data. RESULTS: We found that in mental healthcare, QI-ROI is also conceptualised as any valued monetary and non-monetary benefits. There was a strong emphasis on benefits to external partners and a de-emphasis of benefit monetisation. This conceptualisation was influenced by the 1) perceived mandates to improve quality and manage scarce resources, 2) expectations from QI, 3) health and social care values, 4) ambiguity over expectations, and 5) uncertainty over outcomes. Uncertainty, ambiguity, and potential for disinvestment posed a threat to the stability of this conceptualisation but did not ultimately change it. Health and social care values supported maintaining the QI-ROI as any benefit, with a focus on patients and staff outcomes. Socio-political desires to improve quality were strong drivers for QI investment. CONCLUSION: Mental healthcare leaders primarily conceptualise QI-ROI as any valued benefit. The inclusion of externalised outcomes which are hard to attribute may be challenging. However, mental healthcare services do collaborate with external partners. The de-emphases of benefit monetisation may also be controversial due to the need for financial accountability. Mental healthcare leaders recognise the importance of efficiency savings. However, they raised concerns over the legitimacy and utility of traditional ROI as a tool for assessing QI value. Further research is needed to bring more clarity on these aspects of the QI-ROI concept.

A value of information framework for assessing the trade-offs associated with uncertainty, duration, and cost of chemical toxicity testing.

A number of investigators have explored the use of value of information (VOI) analysis to evaluate alternative information collection procedures in diverse decision-making contexts. This paper presents an analytic framework for determining the value of toxicity information used in risk-based decision making. The framework is specifically designed to explore the trade-offs between cost, timeliness, and uncertainty reduction associated with different toxicity-testing methodologies. The use of the proposed framework is demonstrated by two illustrative applications which, although based on simplified assumptions, show the insights that can be obtained through the use of VOI analysis. Specifically, these results suggest that timeliness of information collection has a significant impact on estimates of the VOI of chemical toxicity tests, even in the presence of smaller reductions in uncertainty. The framework introduces the concept of the expected value of delayed sample information, as an extension to the usual expected value of sample information, to accommodate the reductions in value resulting from delayed decision making. Our analysis also suggests that lower cost and higher throughput testing also may be beneficial in terms of public health benefits by increasing the number of substances that can be evaluated within a given budget. When the relative value is expressed in terms of return-on-investment per testing strategy, the differences can be substantial.

A Cost-Benefit Analysis of School Nursing in One Large Urban School District.

This study is a cost-benefit analysis examining an urban district's partial school nurse coverage conversion to full-time coverage. Through a partnership with a health care system, the district received funding, resulting in the hiring of full-time nurses to cover all K-8 elementary schools. Researchers compared the cost of nursing services to the savings in teacher, secretary, principal, and parent productivity, reduced medical procedure costs, and grants nurses managed. The year before implementing additional nurses, the return on investment (ROI) to the community for nursing services was calculated to be $1.59 for every dollar invested in schools with full-time coverage and $1.29 for schools with partial coverage. After implementing full-time nurses in each school, there was an ROI of $1.50 during the 2015-2016 school year, $1.64 for 2016-2017, and $1.67 for 2017-2018. The analysis provides evidence that full-time coverage could result in a positive ROI for schools and the community.

Evidence-based practice improves patient outcomes and healthcare system return on investment: Findings from a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practice and decision-making have been consistently linked to improved quality of care, patient safety, and many positive clinical outcomes in isolated reports throughout the literature. However, a comprehensive summary and review of the extent and type of evidence-based practices (EBPs) and their associated outcomes across clinical settings are lacking. AIMS: The purpose of this scoping review was to provide a thorough summary of published literature on the implementation of EBPs on patient outcomes in healthcare settings. METHODS: A comprehensive librarian-assisted search was done with three databases, and two reviewers independently performed title/abstract and full-text reviews within a systematic review software system. Extraction was performed by the eight review team members. RESULTS: Of 8537 articles included in the review, 636 (7.5%) met the inclusion criteria. Most articles (63.3%) were published in the United States, and 90% took place in the acute care setting. There was substantial heterogeneity in project definitions, designs, and outcomes. Various EBPs were implemented, with just over a third including some aspect of infection prevention, and most (91.2%) linked to reimbursement. Only 19% measured return on investment (ROI); 94% showed a positive ROI, and none showed a negative ROI. The two most reported outcomes were length of stay (15%), followed by mortality (12%). LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Findings indicate that EBPs improve patient outcomes and ROI for healthcare systems. Coordinated and consistent use of established nomenclature and methods to evaluate EBP and patient outcomes are needed to effectively increase the growth and impact of EBP across care settings. Leaders, clinicians, publishers, and educators all have a professional responsibility related to improving the current state of EBP. Several key actions are needed to mitigate confusion around EBP and to help clinicians understand the differences between quality improvement, implementation science, EBP, and research.

Impact of a Web-based Information and Referral Tool on Access to Federal and State Programs for Older Adults.

Federal and state governments provide a plethora of benefits programs intended to help older Americans, but take-up rates for the programs is low. BenefitsCheckUp® is an online tool intended to increase enrollment in these programs. To evaluate the impact of this national online screening tool providing individualized benefit information, we conducted a web survey of individuals who screened potentially eligible for programs including Supplemental Security Income, Medicaid, Medicare Savings Programs, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and energy assistance. Thirty-six percent of those surveyed applied for at least one benefit at an annualized, estimated average value of $2,865, and 20.5% enrolled, representing about 7% of the approximately 2 million site visitors age 60+. These results indicate that an online screening tool is a promising strategy for increasing benefit take-up rates among older adults with the value of benefits received far exceeding investments.

Engaging the Wisdom of Older Veterans to Enhance VA Healthcare, Research, and Services.

BACKGROUND: Stakeholder engagement helps ensure that research is relevant, clinical innovations are responsive, and healthcare services are patient-centered. OBJECTIVE: Establish and sustain a Veteran engagement board involving older Veterans and caregivers to provide input on aging-related research and clinical demonstration projects. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: The Older Veteran Engagement Team (OVET)-a group of eight Veterans and one caregiver who range in age from 62 to 92-was formed in November 2017 and has met monthly since January 2018. The OVET provides feedback on topics that reflect the foci of the VA Eastern Colorado Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC) (e.g., physical functioning, hearing health, and emotional wellness/mental health). Ongoing evaluation documents the return on investment of Veteran engagement. MAIN MEASURES: The OVET member and provider/investigator meeting evaluations with longitudinal follow-up at 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: Return on investment of Veteran engagement is multi-faceted. For OVET, ROI ranges from grant support to improved healthcare quality/efficiency to social-emotional benefits. To date, funding awards total over $2.3 M for NIH and VA-funded projects to which OVET provided substantive feedback. Documented impacts on healthcare services include reductions in patient wait times, more appropriate utilization of services and increased patient satisfaction. Social-emotional benefits include generativity, as OVET members contribute to improving clinical and community-based supports for other Veterans. The OVET provides an opportunity for older Veterans to share their lived experience with trainees and early career investigators who are preparing for careers serving Veterans. CONCLUSION: The OVET is similar to other established stakeholder engagement groups; team members offer their individual viewpoints at any stage of research, clinical demonstration, or quality improvement projects. The OVET provides a mechanism for the voice of older Veterans and caregivers to shape aspects of individual projects. Importantly, these projects support patient-centered care and promote the characteristics of an age-friendly healthcare system.

Economics of sedentary behaviour: A systematic review of cost of illness, cost-effectiveness, and return on investment studies.

AIMS: METHODS: RESULTS: We identified nine articles (conducted in Australia (n = 5), Europe (n = 3) and China (n = 1)); three reported healthcare costs associated with excessive sedentary time, whilst six were economic evaluations of interventions targeting sedentary behaviour. Healthcare costs associated with excessive sedentary time as reported in cost of illness studies were substantial; however, none explored non-health sector costs. In contrast, all full economics evaluations adopted a societal perspective; however, costs included differed depending on the intervention context. One sedentary behaviour intervention in children was cost-saving. The five interventions targeting occupational sitting time of adults in office workplaces were cost-effective. Physical environmental changes such as sit-stand desks, active workstations etc., were the key cost driver. CONCLUSIONS: Sedentary behaviour is likely associated with excess healthcare costs, although future research should also explore costs across other sectors. Cost-effectiveness evidence of sedentary behaviour reduction interventions in workplaces is limited but consistent. Key gaps relate to the economic credentials of interventions targeting children, and modelling of long-term health benefits of interventions.

Improved 10-year cost savings for patients served by the Boston Children's Hospital Community Asthma Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a 10-year follow-up of asthma cost-savings for patients served by the Community Asthma Initiative (CAI) group compared to a coarsely cost-matched comparison group from similar neighborhoods (comparison group). METHODS: CAI provided home visits and case management services for patients identified through emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations. Asthma costs for the two groups were extracted from the hospital administrative database for ED visits and hospitalizations for one year before and 10 years of follow-up. To eliminate cost differences at intake, a coarse cost-matching was implemented by randomly selecting comparison patients with similar costs to CAI patients (N = 208 pairs). The difference in cost-reduction between CAI and comparison patients was used to compute the adjusted Return on Investment (aROI). RESULTS: There were no significant differences between CAI and comparison groups, including baseline age (5.9 years [SD 2.9] v. 4.4 [SD 3.1]); Hispanic (46.2% v. 35.1%) and Black (43.9% v. 53.0%) race/ethnicity; and public insurance (71.2% v. 68.8%). The cost reduction difference for CAI was significant at one year (P = 0.0001) and two years (P = 0.03), but did not reach the level of significance for years 3-10. The CAI group had a greater cumulative cost reduction of $5,321 (P = 0.08, not significant). Average program cost per patient was $2,636. CAI broke-even after 3 years (aROI = 1.04) and yielded an adjusted ROI of 1.99 at 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: The greater reduction in cumulative cost for CAI patients suggested a shift in trajectory at 10 years of follow-up, resulting in a positive aROI after three years.

Prevention and control of non-communicable diseases in iran: the case for Investment.

BACKGROUND: Non-communicable diseases are imposing a considerable burden on Iran. This study aims to assess the Return on Investment (ROI) for implementation of Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) prevention program in Iran. METHODS: Four disease groups including cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, cancer, and respiratory diseases were included in our ROI analysis. The study followed four steps: 1) Estimating the total economic burden of NCDs using the Cost-of-Illness approach. 2) Estimating the total costs of implementing clinical and preventive interventions using an ingredient based costing at delivering level and a program costing method at central level.3) Calculating health impacts and economic benefits of interventions using the impact measures of avoided incidence, avoided mortality, healthy life years (HLYs) gained, and avoided direct treatment costs. 4) Calculating the ROI for each intervention in 5- and 15- year time horizons. RESULTS: The total economic burden of NCDs to the Iranian economy was IRR 838.49 trillion per year (2018), which was equivalent to 5% of the country's annual Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The package of NCD will lead to 549 000 deaths averted and 2 370 000 healthy life years gained over 15 years, and, financially, Iranian economy will gain IRR 542.22 trillion over 15 years. The highest ROI was observed for the package of physical activity interventions, followed by the interventions addressing salt, tobacco package and clinical interventions. Conclusions NCDs in Iran are causing a surge in health care costs and are contributing to reduced productivity. Those actions to prevent NCDs in Iran, as well as yielding to a notable health impact, are giving a good economic return to the society. This study underscores an essential need for establishment of a national multi-sectorial NCD coordination mechanism to bring together and strengthen existing cross-agency initiatives on NCDs.