HCA 660 Organizations Evaluation Paper

Description

Research Paper, HCA 660Health Economics Valuation OrganizationsRead Chapter 14 in our textbook, “Economic Analysis of Clinical and Managerial Interventions.”Study the websites below for these three organizations: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (UK’s NICE), Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER, in the U.S., note, some people wanted to add the word “National” to its name, so it would be “NICER,” and Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, PCORI). https://www.nice.org.uk/https://icer.org/https://www.pcori.org/relevant:https://yhec.co.uk/glossary/incremental-cost-effectiveness-ratio-icer/#:~:text=An%20ICER%20is%20calculated%20by,expensive%20therapy%20vs%20the%20alternative.Choose three programs or products, with one evaluation from each of these organizations.In an 8-10 page APA-format research paper, discuss the key methods and issues summarized in our textbook, chapter 14. Compare the economic valuation assessments you have selected, with one from each of these organizations. What are the strengths and weaknesses of these assessments, and how could they be improved? Consider the approaches described in Chapter 14, including Cost-Minimization Analysis, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis, Cost-Benefit Analysis, and Cost- Utility Analysis. Refer to the relevant metrics, such as QALYs, etc.Provide at least three (3) scholarly references to support your assessment. Apply APA format for all your formatting, citations, and references, unless otherwise indicated.Your Signature Assignment should be double spaced, and follow APA format. Each paper must include:Title page;Abstract;Use of Level I and II headings (if applicable);In-text citations;References page

2 attachmentsSlide 1 of 2attachment_1attachment_1attachment_2attachment_2.slider-slide > img { width: 100%; display: block; }
.slider-slide > img:focus { margin: auto; }

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Search keywords
C h ap t er 14 : Econ om i c A na ly si s of C l i ni c a l a n d M an a g e ri al In t er ve nt i on s
Q&A
225
(continued)
Urangaandcolleagues(2016)conductedarandomizedcontrolled
trialtocomparefive-daytreatmentwithlongerantibiotictherapies.At
dayfiveoftreatment,patientswithcommunity-acquiredpneumonia
whohadsignificantlyimprovedwererandomlyassignedtodiscontinue
antibioticsorcompletethecourseoftreatmentprescribedbytheir
physician.Patientswerethenfollowedfor30days.Shortertreatments
alsoledtolessantimicrobialresistance,feweradverseeffects,lower
cost,andimprovedadherence.
14.5 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
CEArecognizesthatmeasuringtheincrementalcostofimprovingoutcomes
maybeusefulwhenamoreeffectiveinterventioncostsmore.Inatleastsome
cases, the incremental cost will be so high or so low that a decision can be
basedonit.
In some cases, CEA is not helpful. If the cost per life year saved is
$35,000 or if the cost per injury prevented is $10,000, the answer will not
seemobvious.InthesecasesCBAorCUAmaybeneeded.
Steps in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
1. Estimatetheexpectedcostsforeachoption.
2. Establishhowmuchthehigher-costoptionimprovesoutcomes.
3. Calculatethecostperunitofimprovementinoutcome(e.g.,the
costperlifeyeargainedorthecostperinfectionavoided).
An Example of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
Pregnantwomenshouldstopsmokingformanyreasons,but17percentoflow-incomewomensmokeduringpregnancy(Lietal.2018).
Tryingtoincreasequitrates,Essexandcolleagues(2015)addednicotinereplacementpatchestothestandardcareforpregnantsmokers
(continued)
225 of 361
Signature Assignment – Economic Value Assessment – HCA660 Health Economics – National University
5/22/22, 11:43 AM
Signature Assignment
Course: HCA660 Health Economics
Criteria
30% – Main points, analysis,
synthesis and Supporting
Statements.
100-96% Meets Requirements
95-80% Good – Requires
Improvement
79-60% Fair – Requires
Improvement
> 60% Unsatisfactory>
Criterion Score
4 points
3 points
2 points
1 point
/4
Uses evidence and data as a
basis for comparison of the
two health systems.
Answers all three questions in
the papers.
Uses some evidence and data
as a basis for comparison of
the two health systems.
Answers most of the
questions.
Uses very little if any,
evidence and data as a basis
for comparison of the two
health systems.
Answers only one of the
Fails to use any evidence and
data as a basis for comparison
of the two health systems.
Answers not related to the
questions.
questions.
30% – Considers Implications
20% – Mechanics, Length
and Organization
4 points
3 points
2 points
1 point
Considers all relevant
implications with respect to
cost, access, quality,
disparities, and
recommendations.
Provides clear analysis and
synthesis of how the
limitations drive the need for
change or reform to the
healthcare system.
Considers some implications
with respect to cost, access,
quality, disparities, and
recommendations.
Moderate analysis and
synthesis of how the
limitations drive the need for
change or reform to the
healthcare system.
Considers limited implications
with respect to cost, access,
quality, disparities, and
recommendations.
Limited analysis and synthesis
of how the limitations drive
the need for change or reform
to the healthcare system.
Fails to consider implications
or recognizes them
incorrectly.
Minimal analysis and no
synthesis of how the
limitations drive the need for
change or reform to the
healthcare system.
4 points
3 points
2 points
1 point
Has less than 5 spelling and
grammatical errors
Meets length requirement.
Logically organized and
sequenced.
Content flows from one
concept to the next via
transitions.
Supporting details are used
Has more than 6 spelling and
grammatical errors
Supporting details are not
used effectively to
demonstrate comprehension
of the assignment.
Has more than 6 spelling and
grammatical errors
Length requirement not met.
Not well organized and
sequenced.
Content flows poorly.
Supporting details are not
used effectively to
demonstrate comprehension
Many spelling and
grammatical errors
Length requirement not met.
Poor organization and flow.
None or very limited details
to demonstrate
comprehension of the
assignment.
https://nationalu.brightspace.com/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=135205&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=29530
/4
/4
Page 1 of 2
Signature Assignment – Economic Value Assessment – HCA660 Health Economics – National University
effectively to demonstrate
5/22/22, 11:43 AM
of the assignment.
comprehension of the
assignment.
20% – Sources and APA
format
4 points
3 points
2 points
1 point
Uses valid sources and valid
format for in-text citations
Some errors in sources and
in-text citations and
Limited use sources and
errors with in- text citations
Lacking proper citations and
references.
and references
references
and references
Incorrect format for citations
Follows correct APA format
Incorrect APA format.
Incorrect APA format.
and references.
/4
for all citations and
references.
Total
/ 16
Overall Score
Level 4
Level 3
Level 2
Level 1
11 points minimum
8 points minimum
5 points minimum
0 points minimum
https://nationalu.brightspace.com/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=135205&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=29530
Page 2 of 2

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Explanation & Answer:
9 Pages

Tags:
organizations

Economic Analysis

MANAGERIAL INTERVENTIONS

User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following FENTYESSAYS.COM ESSAY’s honor code & terms of service.