Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11685668

Cost-effectiveness analyses: a basic overview for dermatologists.

S C Chen
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the current age of limited health care resources, cost-effectiveness analyses are important since they provide information that can be used by decision-makers for prioritizing and setting health care policies. OBJECTIVE: This article gives a conceptual overview of cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) by discussing their strengths and limitations, introducing the calculations and variables involved, and outlining the issues in interpreting CEAs using dermatological examples. CONCLUSION: Cost-effectiveness analyses are important tools that dermatologists can use to compare medical interventions using costs, effectiveness, and health outcomes.

Explore related subjects

Cost-Benefit AnalysisDecision Support TechniquesDermatologyEconomics, MedicalHealth Care CostsHumansQuality-Adjusted Life YearsJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S C Chen. 2001-05-02. Cost-effectiveness analyses: a basic overview for dermatologists.. https://doi.org/10.1007/pl00021727

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2003

Low-cost on-the-job peer training of nurses improved immunization coverage in Indonesia.

In Indonesia responsibility for immunizations is placed on local government health centres and on the nurses who provide the immunizations at each centre. An on-the-job peer training programme for these nurses, which was designed to improve the immunization performance of poorly performing health centres in terms of coverage and practice in Maluku province, was evaluated. Experienced immunization nurses were sent to health centres where nurses were inexperienced or performing poorly; the experienced nurses spent 1-2 weeks providing on-the-job training for the less experienced ones. An evaluation of the 13 centres that participated in the programme and the 95 that did not found that the programme increased both immunization coverage and the quality of practice. Coverage of diphtheria/pertussis/tetanus (DPT), polio, and measles vaccinations rose by about 39% in all 13 participating centres when compared with non-participating centres, and by about 54% in the 11 centres that had a functioning transportation system during the year after training. These results reflect increases in the actual number of doses given and improvements in the accuracy of reports. Potential threats to the study's validity were examined and found not to be significant. The out-of-pocket cost of the training programme was about US$ 53 per trainee or about US$ 0.05 per additional vaccine reported to have been given. The marginal cost per additional fully immunized child was estimated to be US$ 0.50.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2002

Endoscopic surgery in Senegal. Benefits, costs and limits.

BACKGROUND: Evaluating the introduction of endoscopic surgery in Senegal may be useful for assessing the role of this technology in developing countries. METHODS: The endoscopic surgery performed at the Hospital Principal and the Hospital Le Dantec, Dakar, from January 1995 to December 2000 was evaluated retrospectively. Operative time, postoperative stay, patients, and hospital costs were compared in samples of 100 patients treated endoscopically and 80 patients treated with open techniques. RESULTS: Altogether, 826 endoscopic procedures were performed (11.6% of elective surgical activity). Of these, thoracoscopic (34%) and laparoscopic (14%) vagotomy, cholecystectomy (21%), fundoplication (12%), and diagnostic laparoscopy (11%) were selected for comparisons. Operative time proved to be reduced by endoscopic surgery except for laparoscopic fundoplication (+40 min). After endoscopic surgery, postoperative hospitalization was 3.7 days shorter, and patient fees were consequently reduced. In 6 years, 87% of the hospital investment (36,000 Euro) was recovered. CONCLUSIONS: Developing countries can benefit from endoscopic surgery. First-world countries might supply staff training.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗