The Impact Of Insurance On Use Of Dental Services And Oral Health
Funder
National Health and Medical Research Council
Funding Amount
$203,616.00
Summary
Dental problems are very common in the Australian population, and health expenditure on dental services is large. This project addresses the impact of dental insurance on use of dental services and oral health outcomes to investigate the effect of insurance on dental visit patterns and mix of dental services provided, and examine how the cost of dental care is related to outcomes such as tooth loss and quality of life.
Development And Valuation Of Cancer-specific Multi-attribute Health States For Use In Economic Evaluation
Funder
National Health and Medical Research Council
Funding Amount
$707,671.00
Summary
Economic evaluation is used by the Australian government in deciding which medical services and pharmaceuticals should be funded. This study will develop quality of life utility measures for use in economic evaluation of cancer interventions in Australia and internationally. This represents a significant methodological contribution to the assessment of quality of life, effectiveness and efficiency in cancer, in one of Australia's national health priority areas.
Measuring Patient Preferences For Treatment Of Colorectal Cancer Using Discrete Choice Modelling
Funder
National Health and Medical Research Council
Funding Amount
$188,912.00
Summary
Around the world, governments, medical professional bodies, individual clinicians and patients are trying to make decisions in health care more rationally. More of these decisions are 'informed' by evidence-based medicine, which depends on a systematic review of all relevant evidence of acceptable scientific rigour. This kind of systematic review has been conducted for the management of colorectal cancer. Patients making choices about possible treatment for colorectal cancer will then have the b ....Around the world, governments, medical professional bodies, individual clinicians and patients are trying to make decisions in health care more rationally. More of these decisions are 'informed' by evidence-based medicine, which depends on a systematic review of all relevant evidence of acceptable scientific rigour. This kind of systematic review has been conducted for the management of colorectal cancer. Patients making choices about possible treatment for colorectal cancer will then have the best 'evidence-based' information to hand. But not enough is known about what aspects of the treatment options matter most to patients. Choosing between different treatment options involves weighing up or trading-off different factors associated with each therapy. Depending on the clinical stage of their cancer, patients may have to choose between the type and size of surgical operation, whether or not to have chemotherapy and-or radiotherapy, the side effects of treatment, the chance of a recurrence of the disease and an early death as well as their quality of life. This research project will ask patients who have already been treated for their colorectal cancer what kind of tradeoffs they make between factors such as disease-free survival, toxicity of treatment and longer term quality of life. This will be done using hypothetical clinical scenarios comparing one type of treatment to another. In this way, the hypothetical choices will be informed by the patient's experience with treatment without asking them to reflect or dwell directly on their own treatment choices. The answers to the hypothetical choice questions can be used to assess what factors in treatment are most important to patients and by how much. This information can then be used by clinicians when presenting evidence-based information on treatment for patients newly diagnosed colorectal cancer.Read moreRead less
Application Of Discrete Choice Experiments To Value Multi-attribute Health States For Use In Economic Evaluation
Funder
National Health and Medical Research Council
Funding Amount
$450,369.00
Summary
Economic evaluation is used increasingly by health care decision makers to decide which health care programs provide the best value for money, in terms of improving health and quality of life outcomes for the population. It is used by the Australian government in deciding which medical services and pharmaceuticals should be funded. This requires measurement of quality of life in a way that allows comparison across treatments, and a means of quantifying community preferences for different health ....Economic evaluation is used increasingly by health care decision makers to decide which health care programs provide the best value for money, in terms of improving health and quality of life outcomes for the population. It is used by the Australian government in deciding which medical services and pharmaceuticals should be funded. This requires measurement of quality of life in a way that allows comparison across treatments, and a means of quantifying community preferences for different health states (that is, how we value health outcomes). Health outcomes are often valued using the quality adjusted life year (QALY) which combines length and quality of life in a single measure. To compare across diseases and treatments, quality of life must be measured in the same way. This can be done by using a standard set of questions that cover the different aspects of quality of life (eg pain, mobility, emotional state). In this way, a single survey instrument can be used for any disease or outcome of treatment. We can also use the same instrument to ask members of the public to provide information about their preferences for different health states (that is how they value health outcomes). However, obtaining this information from respondents is complex, and there is debate about which are the best instruments, and the best methods to value health outcomes. In this research, we propose a new approach to valuing health states, which is easier to administer and which allows for more detailed and rigorous analysis of the responses people give, to provide better models of how the different aspects of quality of life are combined in valuing health outcomes. We will compare the new method with the main existing methods. We will compare these methods for two standard quality of life instruments that are widely used in health care research. The research will also provide valuations of health states from the Australian population that can then be used in economic evaluation.Read moreRead less
Developing A Common Outcome Measure For Priority Setting In Health: Validation Of The 'Transfer To Utility' Technique
Funder
National Health and Medical Research Council
Funding Amount
$314,100.00
Summary
The economic evaluation of health programs is a common requirement of funders and purchasers seeking to get the best value from the health dollar. But researchers employ a wide range of disease specific and generic health status instruments to describe trial outcomes, making comparison between diverse interventions difficult. In response to this problem a 'Transfer to Utility' or TTU technique was developed by Dr Segal and colleagues, to translate diverse outcomes reported in clinical trials, in ....The economic evaluation of health programs is a common requirement of funders and purchasers seeking to get the best value from the health dollar. But researchers employ a wide range of disease specific and generic health status instruments to describe trial outcomes, making comparison between diverse interventions difficult. In response to this problem a 'Transfer to Utility' or TTU technique was developed by Dr Segal and colleagues, to translate diverse outcomes reported in clinical trials, into a utility score, so the performance of diverse health interventions can be expressed in cost-QALY and compared. The technique establishes a statistical transformation between instruments commonly used in clinical trials and a utility value. While the technique appears highly useful, based on a priority setting exercise in osteoarthritis enabling 20 disparate interventions to be compared its validity and applicability in other contexts is not established. The purpose of the grant is to explore the TTU technique to i) establish the best method for estimating the regression equation between common health outcome measures and a utility score and validating that method; ii) test generalisability to other disease areas, for which quality of life is the primary objective of management (in stroke, drug dependence and depression), iii) develop and validate a method for translating the most commonly used measure of general health status, the SF-36, into a utility score and iv) illustrate the application of the TTU in comparing intervensions for the prevention and management of depression. The results of the research will be of value to i) decision makers who must compare the performance of medical-health care interventions across a range of diseases and modalities and ii) to clinicians who want to practice evidenced based health care. The potential health gains for the community are substantial, in supporting the redirection of resources to more effective and cost-effectiveRead moreRead less