Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10025250

Medical surveillance program evaluation. Successful program.

E Lukes
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

1. This program evaluation case example describes changes made to a medical/health surveillance program that resulted in cost savings while increasing services to employees. 2. An integrated computerized recordkeeping system provided immediate feedback to nurse and employee when testing was conducted at distant locations. 3. By offering voluntary health promotion activities simultaneously with a regulatory mandated health/medical surveillance program, employees were able to do "one stop shopping" for programs that had previously been offered separately.

Explore related subjects

Cost SavingsHealth PromotionHumansManagement Information SystemsMass ScreeningOccupational DiseasesOccupational Health ServicesOutcome Assessment, Health CareProgram EvaluationUnited StatesUnited States Occupational Safety and Health AdministrationJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

E Lukes. 1998. Medical surveillance program evaluation. Successful program.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10025250/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Economic impact of shifting the locus of care for neuropathic pain from specialists to general practitioners.

We developed a decision-analytic model to examine the economic impact of shifting the locus of care for patients with painful neuropathies from specialists to GPs. The impetus for such a shift was assumed to be a formal education program, focusing on the recognition and treatment of neuropathic pain, conducted for GPs. In the model, all patients with neuropathic pain were assumed to initiate care with their GPs and then be referred to specialists and, ultimately, pain clinics as required for adequate pain control. Two alternative scenarios were examined--the "current" arrangement in which most patients were assumed to be referred for treatment by specialists and pain clinics and a "hypothetical" arrangement in which GPs were assumed to play an expanded role in the treatment of neuropathic pain and which, therefore, often precluded the need for referral. The model was populated with clinical, epidemiologic, and economic data from Norway. A total of 34,951 persons in Norway were estimated to seek care for painful neuropathies each year. The formal education program was assumed to cost 1.5 million Kroner (NOK). Shifting the locus of care from specialists to GPs would result in 4,715 additional GP visits, but 12,123 fewer specialist visits and 7,967 fewer visits to pain clinics. This change would result in estimated savings to the Norwegian health-care system in 2004 of 74.1 million NOK (approx. US $11.9 million). A partial shift in the locus of care of painful neuropathies from specialists to GPs may result in substantial cost savings to the Norwegian health-care system.

Cost Savings↗
PubMed2007

Decision analysis model of incisional hernia after open abdominal surgery.

BACKGROUND: The incidence rate of incisional hernias after open surgery has been reported to be higher than that of port site hernias after laparoscopic surgery. No studies have compared the costs for the health care system in treating those two types of hernia. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to obtain the baseline data, and a decision analysis model was created to simulate the occurrence and recurrence of incisional and port site hernias. RESULTS: The overall risk of having incisional hernias was eight-times higher than that of having port site hernias (7.4% vs 0.9%). A cost savings of 93 British Pound per patient can be generated for the health care system in the UK. Similar results were obtained for Germany, Italy and France. CONCLUSIONS: The additional treatment costs for incisional hernia should be taken into account when the costs of a surgery performed by open approach are compared with by laparoscopy.

Cost Savings↗