How to Invest in Getting Cost-effective Technologies into Practice? A Framework for Value of Implementation Analysis Applied to Novel Oral Anticoagulants.
Cost-effective interventions are often implemented slowly and suboptimally in clinical practice. In such situations, a range of implementation activities may be considered to increase uptake. A framework is proposed to use cost-effectiveness analysis to inform decisions on how best to invest in implementation activities. This framework addresses 2 key issues: 1) how to account for changes in utilization in the future in the absence of implementation activities; and 2) how to prioritize implementation efforts between subgroups. A case study demonstrates the framework's application: novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for the prevention of stroke in the National Health Service in England and Wales. The results suggest that there is value in additional implementation activities to improve uptake of NOACs, particularly in targeting patients with average or poor warfarin control. At a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, additional investment in an educational activity that increases the utilization of NOACs by 5% in all patients currently taking warfarin generates an additional 254 QALYs, compared with 973 QALYs in the subgroup with average to poor warfarin control. However, greater value could be achieved with higher uptake of anticoagulation more generally: switching 5% of patients who are potentially eligible for anticoagulation but are currently receiving no treatment or are using aspirin would generate an additional 4990 QALYs. This work can help health services make decisions on investment at different points of the care pathway or across disease areas in a manner consistent with the value assessment of new interventions.
Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK (RF, SWa, SP, MS).
Rita
R
Faria
Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK (RF, SWa, SP, MS).
Simon
S
Walker
School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK (SWh, SD).
Sophie
S
Whyte
School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK (SWh, SD).
Simon
S
Dixon
Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK (RF, SWa, SP, MS).
Stephen
S
Palmer
Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK (RF, SWa, SP, MS).
Mark
M
Sculpher
D000925:Anticoagulants / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D001281:Atrial Fibrillation / Q000188:drug therapy*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D003657:Decision Making; D004059:Diffusion of Innovation; D004363:Drug Utilization; D006801:Humans; D008390:Markov Chains; D017059:Models, Econometric; D019057:Quality-Adjusted Life Years; D013222:State Medicine; D020521:Stroke / Q000517:prevention & control*; D006113:United Kingdom; D014859:Warfarin / Q000191:economics / Q000627:therapeutic use
D000925:Anticoagulants; D014859:Warfarin
clinical practice guidelines; cost utility analysis; efficiency; resource allocation; technology assessment