Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10499012

Implementing nurse home visitation programs.

C A Hanks·J Smith
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Nurse home visitation has been an important component of public health for over 100 years. Recent reports of large clinical trials have provided a convincing body of evidence of the cost-effectiveness of home visitation. The findings from these studies have helped to renew policy interest in nurse home visitation as a means of improving health and quality of life for low-income families. Reimplementing home visitation on a large scale, however, will require using nurses with little or no home-visiting experience. Sponsoring organizations must delegate, and nurses from hospitals or clinics must accept, responsibility for both increased autonomy and discretion of home visitors. Case study analysis of observational and interview data from the implementation of a large demonstration home visitation program carried out in a health department in a mid-South city from 1989 to 1994 provides evidence that the bottom-up perspective of Hanf and Toonen (1983) best describes how such programs can be put in place. Nurses with little community experience were able to create appropriate strategies to help families achieve the broad program goals in the context of resource constraints associated with a poverty-level lifestyle and the existing health and human service system. Furthermore, nurses were able to establish an organizational culture and job structure in a city/county health department to support their work.

Explore related subjects

Cost-Benefit AnalysisHealth PromotionHome Care ServicesHumansLife StyleModels, NursingNursing Evaluation ResearchOrganizational Case StudiesPovertyProgram DevelopmentProgram EvaluationPublic Health NursingQuality of LifeUnited StatesClinical TrialJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C A Hanks, J Smith. 1999. Implementing nurse home visitation programs.. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1446.1999.00235.x

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Discounting in economic evaluations: stepping forward towards optimal decision rules.

The National Institute for Clinical Excellence has recently changed its guidelines on discounting costs and effects in economic evaluations. In common with most other regulatory bodies it now requires that health effects should be discounted at the same rate as costs. We show that the guideline leads to sub-optimal decisions because it fails to account for the changing value of health. NICE (and other regulatory bodies) should either use differential discounting or stipulate how the changing value of health should otherwise be dealt with. We also show how binding health service budget constraints should be incorporated in evaluations.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2007

Unrelated medical care in life years gained and the cost utility of primary prevention: in search of a 'perfect' cost-utility ratio.

An important subject of debate in cost-utility analysis of health care programmes is whether to include costs of unrelated medical care in life years gained. The inclusion of such costs is likely to be of consequence in the case of primary prevention. This paper presents different strategies regarding the inclusion not only of the costs, but also of the health effects of unrelated medical care in economic evaluations. Four different cost-utility ratios are presented and related to the criterion of internal consistency. In addition, the possibility to relate the ratios to a well-posed decision problem is analysed. An example computes the different ratios for smoking cessation interventions in different age groups. Including health care costs of unrelated medical care in life years gained increases cost utility ratios, but excluding unrelated medical costs favours smoking cessation interventions targeted at older smokers over those at younger smokers. We conclude that for primary prevention only a cost utility ratio that includes both the costs and effects of unrelated medical care meets the criterion of internal consistency and is related to a meaningful decision problem. Therefore, this type of cost-utility ratio should be preferred even if the data requirements may be substantial.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2007

Cost-effectiveness of automated external defibrillators in public places: pro.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Placement of automated external defibrillators in public facilities is a cost-effective treatment for out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. This review describes the literature citing the benefits of early defibrillation, ease of use, and relative cost of automated external defibrillators. RECENT FINDINGS: Placement of automated external defibrillators in public places was recommended by the American Heart Association in the early 1990s. Compared with waiting for traditional emergency medical services, immediate use of automated external defibrillators by laypersons can dramatically increase survival to hospital discharge rates. Placement of automated external defibrillators at locations such as casinos, airports, and airplanes that are frequented by large numbers of at-risk people is cost-effective compared with other economically acceptable health measures. Studies using simulations to predict numbers of quality-adjusted life years that would be gained from implementation of public access defibrillation programs in high-incidence locations find that the cost would be less than the typically acceptable 50,000 dollars per quality-adjusted life year. The cost estimates, however, depend on the incidence of cardiac arrest at the sites, with low-incidence sites being prohibitively expensive. SUMMARY: Automated external defibrillators appear to be cost-effective in locations with high incidences of cardiac arrest.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗