Explore the vast range of titles available.

Telehealth represents an opportunity for Australia to harness the power of technology to redesign the way health care is delivered. The potential benefits of telehealth include increased accessibility to care, productivity gains for health providers and patients through reduced travel, potential for cost savings, and an opportunity to develop culturally appropriate services that are more sensitive to the needs of special populations. The uptake of telehealth has been hindered at times by clinician reluctance and policies that preclude metropolitan populations from accessing telehealth services. This study aims to investigate if telehealth reduces health system costs compared with traditional service models and to identify the scenarios in which cost savings can be realized. A scoping review was undertaken to meet the study aims. Initially, literature searches were conducted using broad terms for telehealth and economics to identify economic evaluation literature in telehealth. The investigators then conducted an expert focus group to identify domains where telehealth could reduce health system costs, followed by targeted literature searches for corresponding evidence. The cost analyses reviewed provided evidence that telehealth reduced costs when health system-funded travel was prevented and when telehealth mitigated the need for expensive procedural or specialist follow-up by providing competent care in a more efficient way. The expert focus group identified 4 areas of potential savings from telehealth: productivity gains, reductions in secondary care, alternate funding models, and telementoring. Telehealth demonstrated great potential for productivity gains arising from health system redesign; however, under the Australian activity-based funding, it is unlikely that these gains will result in cost savings. Secondary care use mitigation is an area of promise for telehealth; however, many studies have not demonstrated overall cost savings due to the cost of administering and monitoring telehealth systems. Alternate funding models from telehealth systems have the potential to save the health system money in situations where the consumers pay out of pocket to receive services. Telementoring has had minimal economic evaluation; however, in the long term it is likely to result in inadvertent cost savings through the upskilling of generalist and allied health clinicians. Health services considering implementing telehealth should be motivated by benefits other than cost reduction. The available evidence has indicated that although telehealth provides overwhelmingly positive patient benefits and increases productivity for many services, current evidence suggests that it does not routinely reduce the cost of care delivery for the health system.

Background Neck pain is prevalent among office workers. This study evaluated the impact of an ergonomic and exercise training (EET) intervention and an ergonomic and health promotion (EHP) intervention on neck pain intensity among the All Workers and a subgroup of Neck Pain cases at baseline. Methods A 12-month cluster-randomized trial was conducted in 14 public and private organisations. Office workers aged ≥18 years working ≥30 h per week ( n  = 740) received an individualised workstation ergonomic intervention, followed by 1:1 allocation to the EET group (neck-specific exercise training), or the EHP group (health promotion) for 12 weeks. Neck pain intensity (scale: 0–9) was recorded at baseline, 12 weeks, and 12 months. Participants with data at these three time points were included for analysis ( n  = 367). Intervention group differences were analysed using generalized estimating equation models on an intention-to-treat basis and adjusted for potential confounders. Subgroup analysis was performed on neck cases reporting pain ≥3 at baseline ( n  = 96). Results The EET group demonstrated significantly greater reductions in neck pain intensity at 12 weeks compared to the EHP group for All Workers (EET: β = − 0.53 points 95% CI: − 0.84– − 0.22 [36%] and EHP: β = − 0.17 points 95% CI: − 0.47–0.13 [10.5%], p -value = 0.02) and the Neck Cases (EET: β = − 2.32 points 95% CI: − 3.09– − 1.56 [53%] and EHP: β = − 1.75 points 95% CI: − 2.35– − 1.16 [36%], p  = 0.04). Reductions in pain intensity were not maintained at 12 months with no between-group differences observed in All Workers (EET: β = − 0.18, 95% CI: − 0.53–0.16 and EHP: β = − 0.14 points 95% CI: − 0.49–0.21, p  = 0.53) or Neck Cases, although in both groups an overall reduction was found (EET: β = − 1.61 points 95% CI: − 2.36– − 0.89 and EHP: β = − 1.9 points 95% CI: − 2.59– − 1.20, p  = 0.26). Conclusion EET was more effective than EHP in reducing neck pain intensity in All Workers and Neck Cases immediately following the intervention period (12 weeks) but not at 12 months, with changes at 12 weeks reaching clinically meaningful thresholds for the Neck Cases. Findings suggest the need for continuation of exercise to maintain benefits in the longer term. Clinical trial registration hACTRN12612001154897 Date of Registration: 31/10/2012.

Objectives Using an employer's perspective, this study aimed to compare the immediate and longer-term impact of workplace ergonomics and neck-specific exercise versus ergonomics and health promotion information on health-related productivity among a general population of office workers and those with neck pain. Methods A prospective one-year cluster randomized trial was conducted. Participants received an individualized workstation ergonomics intervention, combined with 12 weeks of either workplace neck-specific exercises or health promotion information. Health-related productivity at baseline, post-intervention and 12-months was measured with the Health and Work Performance Questionnaire. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed using multilevel mixed models. Results We recruited 763 office workers from 14 organizations and allocated them to 100 clusters. For the general population of office workers, monetized productivity loss at 12 months [AU$1464 (standard deviation [SD] 1318) versus AU$1563 (SD=1039); P=0.023]; and presenteeism at 12 months [2.0 (SD 1.2) versus 2.4 (SD 1.4); P=0.007] was lower in the exercise group compared to those in the health promotion information group. For office workers with neck pain, exercise participants had lower sickness absenteeism at 12 months compared to health promotion information participants [0.7 days (SD 1.0) versus 1.4 days (SD 3.1); P-=0.012], despite a short-term increase in sickness absenteeism post-intervention compared to baseline for the exercise group [1.2 days (SD 2.2) versus 0.6 days (SD 0.9); P<0.001]. Conclusion A workplace intervention combining ergonomics and neck-specific exercise offers possible benefits for sickness presenteeism and health-related productivity loss among a general population of office workers and sickness absenteeism for office workers with neck pain in the longer-term.

Objective This paper reports on the valuation of quality-of-life states in the Alzheimer’s Disease Five Dimensions (AD-5D) instrument in a representative sample of the general population in Australia using the discrete-choice experiment with duration (DCE TTO ) elicitation technique. Method A DCE with 200 choice sets of two quality-of-life (QoL) state–duration combinations blocked into 20 survey versions, with ten choice sets in each version, was designed and administered online to a sample representative of the Australian population. Two additional choice sets comprising internal consistency and dominance checks were included in each survey version. A range of model specifications investigating preferences with respect to duration and interactions between AD-5D dimension levels were estimated. Utility weights were developed, with estimated coefficients transformed to the 0 (being dead) to 1 (full health) scale, suitable for the calculation of quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) weights for use in economic evaluation. Results In total, 1999 respondents completed the choice experiment. Overall, respondents were slightly better educated and had higher annual incomes than the Australian general population. The estimation results from different specifications and models were broadly consistent with the monotonic nature of the AD-5D: utility increased with increased life expectancy and decreased as the severity level for each dimension worsened. A utility value set was generated for the calculation of utilities for all QoL states defined by the AD-5D descriptive system. Conclusion The DCE-based utility value set is now available to use to generate QALYs for the economic evaluation of treatments and interventions targeting people with dementia and/or their family caregivers.

Background: As our population ages at an increasing rate, the demand for nursing homes is rising. The challenge will be for nursing homes to maintain efficiency with limited resources while not compromising quality. This study aimed to review the nursing home efficiency literature to survey the application of efficiency methods and the measurements of inputs, outputs, facility characteristics and operational environment, with a special focus on quality measurement. Methods: We systematically searched three databases for eligible studies published in English between January 1995 and December 2018, supplemented by an exhaustive search of reference lists of included studies. The studies included were available in full text, their units of analysis were nursing homes, and the analytical methods and efficiency scores were clearly reported. Results: We identified 39 studies meeting the inclusion criteria, of which 31 accounted for quality measures. Standard efficiency measurement techniques, data envelopment analysis and stochastic frontier method, and their specifications (orientation, returns to scale, functional forms and error term assumptions) were adequately applied. Measurements of inputs, outputs and control variables were relatively homogenous while quality measures varied. Notably, most studies did not include all three quality dimensions (structure, process and outcome). One study claimed to include quality of life; however, it was not a well-validated and widely used measure. The impacts of quality on efficiency estimates were mixed. The effect of quality on the ranking of nursing home efficiency was rarely reported. Conclusions: When measuring nursing home efficiency, it is crucial to adjust for quality of care and resident’s quality of life because the ultimate output of nursing homes is quality-adjusted days living in the facility. Quality measures should reflect their multidimensionality and not be limited to quality of throughput (health-related events). More reliable estimation of nursing home efficiencies will require better routine data collection within the facility, where well-validated quality measures become an essential part of the minimum data requirement. It is also recommended that different efficiency methods and assumptions, and alternative measures of inputs, outputs and quality, are used for sensitivity analyses to ensure the robustness and validity of findings.

Background This study uses the RE-AIM framework to provide a process evaluation of a workplace-based cluster randomised trial comparing an ergonomic plus exercise intervention to an ergonomic plus health promotion intervention; and to highlight variations across organisations; and consider the implications of the findings for intervention translation. Method This study applied the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance) methodology to examine the interventions’ implementation and to explore the extent to which differences between participating organisations contributed to the variations in findings. Qualitative and quantitative data collected from individual participants, research team observations and organisations were interrogated to report on the five RE-AIM domains. Results Overall reach was 22.7% but varied across organisations (range 9 to 83%). Participants were generally representative of the recruitment pool though more females ( n  = 452 or 59%) were recruited than were in the pool (49%). Effectiveness measures (health-related productivity loss and neck pain) varied across all organisations, with no clear pattern emerging to indicate the source of the variation. Organisation-level adoption (66%) and staffing level adoption (91%) were high. The interventions were implemented with minimal protocol variations and high staffing consistency, but organisations varied in their provision of resources (e.g. training space, seniority of liaisons). Mean adherence of participants to the EET intervention was 56% during the intervention period, but varied from 41 to 71% across organisations. At 12 months, 15% of participants reported regular EET adherence. Overall mean (SD) adherence to EHP was 56% (29%) across organisations during the intervention period (range 28 to 77%), with 62% of participants reporting regular adherence at 12 months. No organisations continued the interventions after the follow-up period. Conclusion Although the study protocol was implemented with high consistency and fidelity, variations in four domains (reach, effectiveness, adoption and implementation) arose between the 14 participating organisations. These variations may be the source of mixed effectiveness across organisations. Factors known to increase the success of workplace interventions, such as strong management support, a visible commitment to employee wellbeing and participant engagement in intervention design should be considered and adequately measured for future interventions. Trial registration ACTRN12612001154897; 29 October 2012.

Background For many countries, especially those outside the USA without incentive payments, implementing and maintaining electronic medical records (EMR) is expensive and can be controversial given the large amounts of investment. Evaluating the value of EMR implementation is necessary to understand whether or not, such investment, especially when it comes from the public source, is an efficient allocation of healthcare resources. Nonetheless, most countries have struggled to measure the return on EMR investment due to the lack of appropriate evaluation frameworks. Methods This paper outlines the development of an evidence-based digital health cost-benefit analysis (eHealth-CBA) framework to calculate the total economic value of the EMR implementation over time. A net positive benefit indicates such investment represents improved efficiency, and a net negative is considered a wasteful use of public resources. Results We developed a three-stage process that takes into account the complexity of the healthcare system and its stakeholders, the investment appraisal and evaluation practice, and the existing knowledge of EMR implementation. The three stages include (1) literature review, (2) stakeholder consultation, and (3) CBA framework development. The framework maps the impacts of the EMR to the quadruple aim of healthcare and clearly creates a method for value assessment. Conclusions The proposed framework is the first step toward developing a comprehensive evaluation framework for EMRs to inform health decision-makers about the economic value of digital investments rather than just the financial value.

To identify, review, and critically appraise model-based economic evaluations of all types of interventions for people with dementia and their carers. A systematic literature search was undertaken to identify model-based evaluations of dementia interventions. A critical appraisal of included studies was carried out using guidance on good practice methods for decision-analytic models in health technology assessment, with a focus on model structure, data, and model consistency. Interventions for people with dementia and their carers, across prevention, diagnostic, treatment, and disease management. We identified 67 studies, with 43 evaluating pharmacological products, 19 covering prevention or diagnostic strategies, and 5 studies reporting non-pharmacological interventions. The majority of studies use Markov models with a simple structure to represent dementia symptoms and disease progression. Half of all studies reported taking a societal perspective, with the other half adopting a third-party payer perspective. Most studies follow good practices in modeling, particularly related to the decision problem description, perspective, model structure, and data inputs. Many studies perform poorly in areas related to the reporting of pre-modeling analyses, justifying data inputs, evaluating data quality, considering alternative modeling options, validating models, and assessing uncertainty. There is a growing literature on the model-based evaluations of interventions for dementia. The literature predominantly reports on pharmaceutical interventions for Alzheimer's disease, but there is a growing literature for dementia prevention and non-pharmacological interventions. Our findings demonstrate that decision-makers need to critically appraise and understand the model-based evaluations and their limitations to ensure they are used, interpreted, and applied appropriately.

Background/aimAnterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is a common and devastating sporting injury. With or without ACL reconstruction, the risk of knee osteoarthritis (OA) and permanent disability later in life is markedly increased. While neuromuscular training programmes can prevent 50–80% of ACL injuries, no national implementation strategies exist in Australia. The aim of this study was to compare the ability of four alternative national universal ACL injury prevention programme implementation strategies to reduce future medical costs secondary to ACL injury.MethodsA Markov economic decision model was constructed to estimate the value in lifetime future medical costs prevented by implementing a national ACL prevention programme among four hypothetical cohorts: high-risk sport participants (HR) aged 12–25 years; HR 18–25 years; HR 12–17 years; all youths (ALL) 12–17 years.ResultsOf the four programmes examined, the HR 12–25 programme provided the greatest value, averting US$693 of direct healthcare costs per person per lifetime or US$221 870 880 in total. Without training, 9.4% of this cohort will rupture their ACL and 16.8% will develop knee OA. Training prevents 3764 lifetime ACL ruptures per 100 000 individuals, a 40% reduction in ACL injuries. 842 lifetime cases of OA per 100 000 individuals and 584 TKRs per 100 000 are subsequently averted. Numbers needed to treat ranged from 27 for the HR 12–25 to 190 for the ALL 12–17.ConclusionsThe HR 12–25 programme was the most effective implementation strategy. Estimation of the break-even cost of health expenditure savings will enable optimal future programme design, implementation and expenditure.