Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 8078038

Good quality quality? Some methodological issues.

Abstract

The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C E Selai, R M Rosser. 1993. Good quality quality? Some methodological issues.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8078038/

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

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↗

Low-dose or standard-dose proton pump inhibitors for maintenance therapy of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies on the use of low-dose proton pump inhibitor for the maintenance therapy of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease have shown that it might be comparable with standard-dose proton pump inhibitor treatment and superior to standard-dose histamine-2 receptor antagonist therapy. AIM: To compare the impact of standard-dose histamine-2 receptor antagonist, low-dose proton pump inhibitor and standard-dose proton pump inhibitor treatment for the maintenance therapy of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease on symptom control and health care resource utilization from the perspective of a public health organization in Hong Kong. METHODS: A Markov model was designed to simulate, over 12 months, the economic and clinical outcomes of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients treated with standard-dose histamine-2 receptor antagonist, low-dose proton pump inhibitor and standard-dose proton pump inhibitor. The transition probabilities were derived from the literature. Resource utilization was retrieved from a group of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients in Hong Kong. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to examine the robustness of the model. RESULTS: The standard-dose proton pump inhibitor strategy was associated with the highest numbers of symptom-free patient-years (0.954 years) and quality-adjusted life-years gained (0.999 years), followed by low-dose proton pump inhibitor and standard-dose histamine-2 receptor antagonist. The direct medical cost per patient in the standard-dose proton pump inhibitor group (904 US dollars) was lower than those of the low-dose proton pump inhibitor and standard-dose histamine-2 receptor antagonist groups. CONCLUSIONS: The standard-dose proton pump inhibitor strategy appears to be the most effective and least costly for the maintenance management of patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in Hong Kong.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗

Impact of DOTS compared with DOTS-plus on multidrug resistant tuberculosis and tuberculosis deaths: decision analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to determine the impact of the World Health Organization's directly observed treatment strategy (DOTS) compared with that of DOTS-plus on tuberculosis deaths, mainly in the developing world. DESIGN: Decision analysis with Monte Carlo simulation of a Markov decision tree. DATA SOURCES: People with smear positive pulmonary tuberculosis. DATA ANALYSIS: Analyses modelled different levels of programme effectiveness of DOTS and DOTS-plus, and high (10%) and intermediate (3%) proportions of primary multidrug resistant tuberculosis, while accounting for exogenous reinfection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The cumulative number of tuberculosis deaths per 100 000 population over 10 years. RESULTS: The model predicted that under DOTS, 276 people would die from tuberculosis (24 multidrug resistant and 252 not multidrug resistant) over 10 years under optimal implementation in an area with 3% primary multidrug resistant tuberculosis. Optimal implementation of DOTS-plus would result in four (1.5%) fewer deaths. If implementation of DOTS-plus were to result in a decrease of just 5% in the effectiveness of DOTS, 16% more people would die with tuberculosis than under DOTS alone. In an area with 10% primary multidrug resistant tuberculosis, 10% fewer deaths would occur under optimal DOTS-plus than under optimal DOTS, but 16% more deaths would occur if implementation of DOTS-plus were to result in a 5% decrease in the effectiveness of DOTS CONCLUSIONS: Under optimal implementation, fewer tuberculosis deaths would occur under DOTS-plus than under DOTS. If, however, implementation of DOTS-plus were associated with even minimal decreases in the effectiveness of treatment, substantially more patients would die than under DOTS.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗