Patients' valuation of the prescribing nurse in primary care: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Recently, primary care in the United Kingdom has undergone substantial changes in skill mix. Non-medical prescribing was introduced to improve patient access to medicines, make better use of different health practitioners' skills and increase patient choice. There is little evidence about value-based patient preferences for 'prescribing nurse' in a general practice setting. OBJECTIVE: To quantify value-based patient preferences for the profession of prescriber and other factors that influence choice of consultation for managing a minor illness. DESIGN: Discrete choice experiment patient survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Five general practices in England with non-medical prescribing services, questionnaires completed by 451 patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Stated choice of consultation. MAIN RESULTS: There was a strong general preference for consulting 'own doctor' for minor illness. However, a consultation with a nurse prescriber with positive patient-focused attributes can be more acceptable to patients than a consultation provided by a doctor. Attributes 'professional's attention to Patients' views' and extent of 'help offered' were pivotal. Past experience influenced preference. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Respondents demonstrated valid preferences. Preferences for consulting a doctor remained strong, but many were happy to consult with a nurse if other aspects of the consultation were improved. Findings show who to consult is not the only valued factor in choice of consultation for minor illness. The 'prescribing nurse' role has potential to offer consultation styles that patients value. Within the study's limitations, these findings can inform delivery of primary care to enhance patient experience and substitute appropriate nurse prescribing consultations for medical prescribing consultations.

Women's preferences for inpatient and outpatient priming for labour induction: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: In many countries a high proportion of births begin as induced labours. Induction can be lengthy if cervical priming is required prior to induction. This usually occurs as an inpatient, however, an alternative is to allow women to go home after satisfactory fetal monitoring. The aim of this study was to assess the preferences of women for cervical priming for induction of labour in an outpatient or inpatient setting. METHOD: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted alongside a randomised trial of inpatient and outpatient cervical priming (the OPRA trial) in two maternity hospitals in South Australia. 362 participants were included, and women's preferences for cervical priming for induction of labour were assessed. RESULTS: Women were willing to accept an extra 1.4 trips to hospital (2.4 trips total) and a total travel time of 73.3 minutes to be able to return to their own home while waiting for the priming to work. For enhanced inpatient services, women were willing to accept a total travel time of 54.7 minutes to have a private room with private bathroom while waiting for the priming to work. The overall benefit score for outpatient priming was 3.63, 3.59 for enhanced inpatient care and 2.89 for basic inpatient care, suggesting slightly greater preferences for outpatient priming. Preferences for outpatient priming increased when women could return to their own home (compared to other offsite accommodation), and decreased with more trips to hospital and longer travel time. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that outpatient priming was slightly more preferred than either enhanced inpatient priming or basic care; these results should be confirmed in different clinical settings. There may be merit in providing women information about both options in the future, as preferences varied according to the characteristics of the services on offer and the sociodemographic background of the woman.

Valuing the extended role of prescribing pharmacist in general practice: results from a discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify patients' preferences for new pharmacist independent prescribing services in general practice for managing common existing long-term conditions compared with usual medical prescribing. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment cross-sectional survey was conducted in five general practices in England (October-November 2009). Four service attributes reported on the length of consultation and aspects of patient-professional interaction. A choice between three alternatives-novel pharmacist independent prescribing service ("prescribing pharmacist"), "own (family) doctor" service, and "available (family) doctor" service-was presented. Alternative regression models were compared according to their goodness of fit, and the preferred one was used to inform policy analysis. RESULTS: A total of 451 patients completed questionnaires. Respondents preferred a "pharmacist" or "own doctor" compared with "available doctor," with a larger value given to own doctor. All attributes on patient-professional interaction were important in choosing how to manage diagnosed hypertension, while the "length of consultation" (P = 0.42) did not have any impact. The impact of introducing a pharmacist prescribing service into a general practice setting was estimated from these findings. Patients' preferences suggested that about 16% of consultations with a patient's own doctor can be switched to a prescribing pharmacist instead. Although there is a stronger preference for seeing own doctor, alternative combinations of attribute levels can be used to compensate and reconfigure a more preferred prescribing pharmacist service. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacist service is valued by patients as an alternative to doctor prescribing in primary care and therefore represents an acceptable form of service delivery when informing policy.

Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature.

Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) have become a commonly used instrument in health economics. This paper updates a review of published papers between 1990 and 2000 for the years 2001-2008. Based on this previous review, and a number of other key review papers, focus is given to three issues: experimental design; estimation procedures; and validity of responses. Consideration is also given to how DCEs are applied and reported. We identified 114 DCEs, covering a wide range of policy questions. Applications took place in a broader range of health-care systems, and there has been a move to incorporating fewer attributes, more choices and interview-based surveys. There has also been a shift towards statistically more efficient designs and flexible econometric models. The reporting of monetary values continues to be popular, the use of utility scores has not gained popularity, and there has been an increasing use of odds ratios and probabilities. The latter are likely to be useful at the policy level to investigate take-up and acceptability of new interventions. Incorporation of interactions terms in the design and analysis of DCEs, explanations of risk, tests of external validity and incorporation of DCE results into a decision-making framework remain important areas for future research.

Exploring the social value of health-care interventions: a stated preference discrete choice experiment.

Much of the literature on distributive preferences covers specific considerations in isolation, and recent reviews have suggested that research is required to inform on the relative importance of various key considerations. Responding to this research recommendation, we explore the distributive preferences of the general public using a set of generic social value judgments. We report on a discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey, using face-to-face interviews, in a sample of the general population (n=259). The context for the survey was resource allocation decisions in the UK National Health Service, using the process of health technology appraisal as an example. The attributes used covered health improvement, value for money, severity of health, and availability of other treatments, and it is the first such survey to use cost-effectiveness in scenarios described to the general public. Results support the feasibility and acceptability of the DCE approach for the elicitation of public preferences. Choice data are used to consider the relative importance of changes across attribute levels, and to model utility scores and relative probabilities for the full set of combinations of attributes and levels in the experimental design used (n=64). Results allow the relative social value of health technology scenarios to be explored. Findings add to a sparse literature on 'social' preferences, and show that DCE data can be used to consider the strength of preference over alternative scenarios in a priority-setting context.

Is fast access to general practice all that should matter? A discrete choice experiment of patients' preferences.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the relative importance of factors that influence patient choice in the booking of general practice appointments for two health problems. METHODS: Two discrete choice experiments incorporated into a survey of general practice patients and qualitative methods to support survey development. RESULTS: An overall response of 94% (1052/1123) was achieved. Factors influencing the average respondent's choice of appointment, in order of importance, were: seeing a doctor of choice; booking at a convenient time of day; seeing any available doctor; and having an appointment sooner rather than later (acute, low worry condition). This finding was the same for an ongoing, high worry condition but in addition the duration of the appointment was also of (small) value. Patients traded off speed of access for more convenient appointment times (a willingness to wait an extra 2.5-3 days longer to get a convenient time slot for an acute low worry/ongoing, high worry condition, respectively). However, contrary to expectation, patients were willing to trade off speed of access for continuity of care (e.g. willingness to wait five days longer to see the doctor of their choice for an acute, low worry condition). Preferences varied by a person's gender, work and carer status. CONCLUSIONS: Patients hold strong preferences for the way general practice appointment systems are managed. Contrary to current policy on improving access to primary care patients value a more complex mix of factors than fast access at all costs. It is important that policy-makers and practices take note of these preferences.

Clinical, psychosocial, and economic effects of antenatal day care for three medical complications of pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial of 395 women.

BACKGROUND: Day care is increasingly being used for complications of pregnancy, but there is little published evidence on its efficacy. We assessed the clinical, psychosocial, and economic effects of day care for three pregnancy complications in a randomised trial of day care versus standard care on an antenatal ward. METHODS: 395 women were randomly assigned day (263) or ward (132) care in a ratio of two to one, stratified for major diagnostic categories (non-proteinuric hypertension, proteinuric hypertension, and preterm premature rupture of membranes). The research hypothesis was that for these disorders, as an alternative to admission, antenatal day care will reduce specified interventions and investigations, result in no differences in clinical outcome, lead to greater satisfaction and psychological wellbeing, and be more cost-effective. Data were collected through case-note review, self-report questionnaires (response rates 81.0% or higher) and via the hospital's financial system. Analysis was by intention to treat. FINDINGS: All participants were included in the analyses. There were no differences between the groups in antenatal tests or investigations or intrapartum interventions. The total duration of antenatal care episodes was shorter in the day-care group than in the ward group (median 17 [IQR 5-9] vs 57 [35-123] h; p=0.001). Overall stay was also significantly shorter in the day-care group (mean 7.22 [SE 0.31] vs 8.53 [0.44]; p=0.014). The median number of care episodes was three (range one to 14) in the day-care group and two (one to nine) in the ward group (p=0.01). There were no statistically or clinically significant differences in maternal or perinatal outcomes. The day-care group reported greater satisfaction, with no evidence of unintended psychosocial sequelae. There was no significant difference in either average cost per patient or average cost per day of care. INTERPRETATION: Since clinical outcomes and costs are similar, adoption by maternity services of a policy providing specified women with the choice between admission and day-unit care seems appropriate.

A clinical and cost evaluation of hemodialysis in renal satellite units in England and Wales.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence rate of renal replacement therapy in the United Kingdom has increased significantly, particularly by long-term hemodialysis (HD) therapy in renal satellite units (RSUs). These are largely nurse-run units linked to main renal units (MRUs). We compared outcomes, processes of care, and costs in RSUs with those in MRUs. METHODS: A cross-sectional comparison was performed of HD patients from a representative sample of 12 RSUs in England and Wales and HD patients in the linked MRUs deemed suitable by the senior nurse for RSU care. Data for patient characteristics, clinical process and outcome measures, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and patient satisfaction were collected. A partial analysis of National Health Service and social care costs was undertaken. Geographic access was assessed by road time and distance traveled to dialysis sessions. RESULTS: Seven hundred thirty-six of 895 eligible patients (82%) participated. RSU patients were older (mean age, 63 versus 57 years), but had comorbidity similar to that of MRU patients. There were no significant differences in most processes of care or clinical outcomes; achievement of standards for adequacy of dialysis (urea reduction ratio) was significantly greater in RSU patients and hospitalization in the last year was less frequent. Patient HRQoL was similar, but patient satisfaction was greater in RSU patients. RSU patients potentially saved 19 minutes traveling for each dialysis session. Costs for routine dialysis and health/social care were similar. CONCLUSION: RSUs appear to be as effective as main HD units for a wide spectrum of patients, improve geographic access, and are more acceptable to patients. There is evidence that they are as cost-effective as main units.

Using discrete choice experiments to value health care programmes: current practice and future research reflections.

There has been growing interest in discrete choice experiments (DCEs) in health economics over the last few years. This paper identifies and describes applications conducted during 1990-2000. From this basis some important areas for future research are reflected upon. These include: having a better understanding of how respondents interpret price, risk and time attributes; strengthening designs and analysis; investigating decision making heuristics employed when completing DCEs, and the extent these are related to the complexity of the task; external validity, reliability and generalisability. Collaborative work with statistical design experts, psychologists, sociologists and qualitative researchers will prove useful when investigating these issues. It is also critical to link, more generally, the research agenda to work being carried out in marketing, transport and environmental economics and health economics benefit assessment.

Inclusiveness in the health economic evaluation space.

This paper presents an overview of Gavin Mooney's contributions to broadening the evaluative space in health economics. It outlines how Mooney's ideas have encouraged many, including ourselves, to expand the conventional QALYs/health gain approach and look more broadly at what it is that is of value from health services. We reflect on Mooney's contributions to debates around cost-effectiveness analysis, Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and cost-utility analysis as well as his contribution to the development and application of contingent valuation and discrete choice experiments in health economics. We conclude by suggesting important avenues for future research to take forward Mooney's work.

Preferences for policy options for cannabis in an Australian general population: A discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Policy choices for illicit drugs such as cannabis entail consideration of competing factors such as individual health, societal views about pleasure, and criminal justice impacts. Society must weigh up these factors in determining the preferred cannabis policy; although often cast as a contest between legalisation of cannabis or full prohibition the actual policy choices are not so black and white. This study assessed societal preferences for different cannabis policies and multiple consequences. METHOD: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) quantified value-based preferences for alternative cannabis policies described by the five key attributes legal status, health harms, criminal justice service costs, rates of cannabis use and purchase location. An online survey was conducted on a population sample of 1020 Australians. The analytical model was based on stated choices for Policy A, B or Current Policy. RESULTS: The results revealed a strong general preference for either civil penalties or legalisation compared to cannabis cautioning (Current Policy) and a strong dislike of criminalising possession and use of cannabis. Results also demonstrate difference in preferences among those with different demographics and beliefs. Understanding these nuances help to quantify the range of preferences held within the population and can be used to inform policy. CONCLUSION: This is the first known DCE survey applied to the area of illicit drugs policy. It demonstrates the public hold disparate views on the most appropriate status for cannabis offences and they are able to make trade-offs between policy choices and outcomes in complex areas of social policy.

A primary care specialist genetics service: a cluster-randomised factorial trial.

BACKGROUND: GPs do not have the confidence to identify patients at increased genetic risk. A specialist primary care clinical genetics service could support GPs with referral and provide local clinics for their patients. AIM: To test whether primary care genetic-led genetics education improves both non-cancer and cancer referral rates, and primary care-led genetics clinics improve the patient pathway. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cluster-randomised factorial trial in 73 general practices in the south of England. METHOD: Practices randomised to receive case scenario based seminar (intervention) or not (control), and referred patients a primary (intervention) or secondary (control) care genetic counsellor (GC)-led appointment. OUTCOME MEASURES: GP referral and clinic attendance rates (primary), appropriate cancer and case scenario referral rates, patient satisfaction, clinic costs, and case management (secondary). RESULTS: Eighty-nine and 68 referrals made by 36 intervention and 37 control practices respectively. There was a trend towards an overall higher referral rate among educated GPs (referral rate ratio [RRR] 1.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.89 to 2.02; P = 0.161), and they made more appropriate cancer referrals (RRR 2.36, 95% CI = 1.07 to 5.24; P = 0.035). No indication of difference in clinic attendance rates (odds ratio 0.91, 95% CI = 0.43 to 1.95; P = 0.802) or patient satisfaction (P = 0.189). Patients spent 49% less travelling (£3.60 versus £6.62; P<0.001) and took 33% less time (39.7 versus 57.7 minutes; P<0.001) to attend a primary than secondary care appointment; 83% of GC-managed appointments met the 18-week referral to treatment, NHS target. CONCLUSION: An integrated primary care genetics service both supports GPs in appropriate cancer referral and provides care in the right place by the right person.

The introduction of integrated out-of-hours arrangements in England: a discrete choice experiment of public preferences for alternative models of care.

OBJECTIVE: To establish which generic attributes of general practice out-of-hours health services are important to the public. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment postal survey conducted in three English general practitioner (GP) co-operatives. A total of 871 individuals aged 20-70 years registered with a GP. Outcomes were preferences for, and trade-offs between: time to making initial contact, time waiting for advice/treatment, informed of expected waiting time, type of contact, professional providing advice, chance contact relieves anxiety, and utility estimates for valuing current models of care. RESULTS: Response rate was 37%. Respondents valued out-of-hours contact for services for reducing anxiety but this was not the only attribute of importance. They had preferences for the way in which services were organized and valued information about expected waiting time, supporting findings from elsewhere. Participants were most willing to make trade-offs between waiting time and professional person. Of the predicted utility for three models of care utility was higher for fully integrated call management. CONCLUSIONS: Greater utility might be achieved if existing services are re-configured more in line with the government's fully integrated call management model. Because the attributes were described in generic terms, the findings can be applied more generally to the plethora of models that exist (and many that might exist in the future). The approach used is important for achieving greater public involvement in how health services develop. Few experiments have elicited public preferences for health services in the UK to date. This study showed valid preferences were expressed but there were problems obtaining representative views from the public.

The psychosocial outcomes of antenatal day care for three medical complications of pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial of 395 women.

BACKGROUND: Although antenatal day care is becoming increasingly common, there is little evidence as to the psychosocial efficacy of this model of care. AIM: We aimed to assess the broader psychosocial impact of antenatal day care compared with admission to hospital. METHODS: We carried out a randomised trial of 395 women, randomly assigned in a 2 : 1 ratio between day care and antenatal ward, stratified for major diagnostic categories (proteinuric hypertension, non-proteinuric hypertension and preterm premature rupture of membranes). Main outcome measures--self-report questionnaires (response rates ranging from 80 to 90%) were sent to women's homes four days after randomisation and seven weeks after delivery. RESULTS: Overall, there were statistically significant differences favouring day care in 12 of 28 items at four days post-randomisation, with no differences in the two groups for the other 16 items. At seven weeks postdelivery, we found differences in eight of 28 items favouring day care, with no differences in the two groups for the other 20 items. The types of items indicating a sustained difference covered a range of aspects of care and included satisfaction with staff, continuity of carer, information transfer, and social support. There were no differences in relation to infant feeding and relationship with the baby. CONCLUSIONS: Day care has an effect on women's satisfaction with care but does not produce broader psychosocial outcomes.

Preferences of patients for emergency services available during usual GP surgery hours: a discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVE: A study was undertaken to investigate patients' strength of preferences for attributes or characteristics associated with delivery of emergency primary care services available during usual GP surgery hours and to investigate the trade-offs between attributes. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was used to quantify patients' strength of preferences for several key attributes of usual-hours emergency primary care. The attributes were chosen to reflect the findings of previous research, current policy initiatives and discussions with local key stakeholders. A self-complete questionnaire was administered to NHS Direct callers and adult attenders at Accident and Emergency, GP services and the NHS Walk-in Centre in the locality. Regression analysis was used to estimate the relative importance to patients of the different attributes. RESULTS: An overall response of 71% (n=432) was achieved. All but one of the attributes was a statistically significant predictor of preference. The attribute 'being kept informed about waiting time' was the most important. This was followed by 'quality of the consultation', 'having a consultation with a nurse', 'having a consultation with a doctor' and 'contacting the service in person'. Respondents were prepared to wait an extra 68 min to have a consultation with a doctor, but an extra 2 h 9 min for information about expected waiting time. There were no measurable preference differences between patients surveyed at different NHS entry points. Respondents younger than 45 years held strong preferences with respect to how they wanted to make contact with the system, whereas older respondents appeared not to hold strong preferences, seemingly indifferent between the alternatives. There was weak evidence which showed the younger group more strongly preferred accessing services via an integrated telephone system than making contact in person. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that local solutions for reforming emergency primary care during hours when the GP surgery is open should take account of the strength of patient preferences. The discrete choice method was acceptable, and the results directly informed the development of a local service framework for such care.

Effect of introduction of integrated out of hours care in England: observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify service integration achieved in the national exemplar programme for single call access to out of hours care through NHS Direct, and its effect on the wider health system. DESIGN: Observational before and after study of demand, activity, and trends in the use of other health services. PARTICIPANTS: 34 general practice cooperatives with NHS Direct partners (exemplars): four were case exemplars; 10 control cooperatives. SETTING: England. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Extent of integration; changes in demand, activity, and trends in emergency ambulance transports; attendances at emergency departments, minor injuries units, and NHS walk-in centres; and emergency admissions to hospital in the first year. RESULTS: Of 31 distinct exemplars, 21 (68%) integrated all out of hours call management. Nine (29%) achieved single call access for all patients. In the only case exemplar where direct comparison was possible, a higher proportion of telephone calls were handled by cooperative nurses before integration than by NHS Direct afterwards (2622/6687 (39%) v 2092/7086 (30%): P < 0.0001). Other case exemplars did not achieve 30%. A small but significant downturn in overall demand for care seen in two case exemplars was also seen in the control cooperatives. The number of emergency ambulance transports increased in three of the four case exemplars after integration, reaching statistical significance in two (5%, -0.02% to 10%, P = 0.06; 6%, 1% to 12%, P = 0.02; 7%, 3% to 12%, P = 0.001). This was always accompanied by a significant reduction in the number of calls to the integrated service. CONCLUSION: Most exemplars achieved integration of call management but not single call access for patients. Most patients made at least two telephone calls to contact NHS Direct, and then waited for a nurse to call back. Evidence for transfer of demand from case exemplars to 999 ambulance services may be amenable to change, but NHS Direct may not have sufficient capacity to support national implementation of the programme.

Comparison of apparent efficiency of haemodialysis satellite units in England and Wales using data envelopment analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To expand care for chronic haemodialysis (HD) patients throughout England and Wales by studying two aspects of service delivery that are important: to identify relative performance of haemodialysis satellite units (HDSUs), and understand the factors that influence the performance. As a first step toward these aspects, this work reports a study of apparent comparative efficiency in the delivery of HDSUs and demonstrates the potential of data envelopment analysis (DEA). METHODS: DEA was applied to data obtained from a national survey of the organizational structures and processes of delivering care at HDSUs in England and Wales. RESULTS: DEA was found to be a judicious approach for performance assessment of HDSUs, although valid results depend on appropriate model specification and quality of data available. The available data were not of sufficient comprehensiveness or quality to produce definitive results but suggested that overall efficiency could improve; these data suggested by as much as 10% overall (mean efficiency score 90%) and variably within the sample (46 [65%] that HDSUs were potentially inefficient, the lowest unit scoring 38%). CONCLUSIONS: Addressing questions raised by comparative inefficiency could help plans to improve capacity to deal with the growing demand for HD delivered in HDSUs. The application was an important start and needs to be followed by further research to establish model validity and obtain authoritative results.

EQ-5D versus SF-6D in an older, chronically Ill patient group.

Choosing between preference-based instruments of health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) in particular situations is an important area for research. Even where instruments can be assumed to be measuring the same thing, they may not be interchangeable. The study presented investigates the extent to which EQ-5D and SF-6D instruments are interchangeable in an older, chronically ill patient group undergoing haemodialysis. Head-to-head comparisons were made using 'practicality', 'descriptive validity', 'empirical validity', mean utilities and associated distributions. Overall it was difficult to choose between instruments on the basis of descriptive or empirical validity, since both performed similarly. Important differences were, however, found relating to practicality: a significantly higher response rate in favour of EQ-5D; and lower levels of missing data to derive health states. Non-response was significantly associated with age and co-morbidity of respondents. We suggest that in patients undergoing haemodialysis, and potentially other older chronically ill patient groups, EQ-5D is the primary preference-based generic HR-QOL instrument.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of donepezil, rivastigmine, and galantamine for Alzheimer's disease. A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Systematic review of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of donepezil, rivastigmine, and galantamine for people suffering from Alzheimer's disease. METHODS: Sixteen electronic databases (including MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Embase) and bibliographies of related papers were searched for published/unpublished English language studies, and experts and pharmaceutical companies were consulted for additional information. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and economic studies were selected. Clinical effectiveness was assessed on measurement scales assessing progression of Alzheimer's disease on the person's global health, cognition, functional ability, behavior and mood, and quality of life. Cost-effectiveness was presented as incremental cost per year spent in a nonsevere state (by Mini Mental Health State Examination) or quality-adjusted life-year. RESULTS: Twelve of 15 RCTs included were judged to be of good quality. Although donepezil had beneficial effects in Alzheimer's patients on global health and cognition, rivastigmine on global health, and galantamine on global health, cognition, and functional scales, these improvements were small and may not be clinically significant. Measures of quality of life and behavior and mood were rarely assessed. Adverse effects were usually mild and transient. Cost-effectiveness base case estimates ranged from 2,415 Pounds savings to 49,476 Pounds additional cost (1997 prices) per unit of effect for donepezil and a small savings for rivastigmine. Estimates were not considered robust or generalizable. CONCLUSIONS: Donepezil, rivastigmine, and galantamine appear to have some clinical effect for people with Alzheimer's disease, although the extent to which these translate into real differences in everyday life remains unclear. Due to the nature of current economic studies, cost-effectiveness remains uncertain and the impact on different care sectors has been inadequately investigated. Further research is needed to establish the actual benefits of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEls) for people with Alzheimer's disease and their caregivers, the relationship of these changes to clinical management, and careful prospective evaluation of resource and budgetary consequences.