Value for Money in Changing Clinical Practice: Should Decisions about Guidelines and Implementation Strategies Be Made Sequentially or Simultaneously?

Ties Hoomans, Johan L. Severens, Silvia M. A. A. Evers and Andre J. H. A. Ament
Additional contact information
Ties Hoomans: Department of Health Organisation, Policy, and Economics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands, t.hoomans@beoz.unimaas.nl
Johan L. Severens: Department of Health Organisation, Policy, and Economics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and MTA, University Hospital Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
Silvia M. A. A. Evers: Department of Health Organisation, Policy, and Economics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
Andre J. H. A. Ament: Department of Health Organisation, Policy, and Economics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands

Medical Decision Making, 2009, vol. 29, issue 2, 207-216

Abstract: Decisions about clinical practice change, that is, which guidelines to adopt and how to implement them, can be made sequentially or simultaneously. Decision makers adopting a sequential approach first compare the costs and effects of alternative guidelines to select the best set of guideline recommendations for patient management and subsequently examine the implementation costs and effects to choose the best strategy to implement the selected guideline. In an integral approach, decision makers simultaneously decide about the guideline and the implementation strategy on the basis of the overall value for money in changing clinical practice. This article demonstrates that the decision to use a sequential v. an integral approach affects the need for detailed information and the complexity of the decision analytic process. More importantly, it may lead to different choices of guidelines and implementation strategies for clinical practice change. The differences in decision making and decision analysis between the alternative approaches are comprehensively illustrated using 2 hypothetical examples. We argue that, in most cases, an integral approach to deciding about change in clinical practice is preferred, as this provides more efficient use of scarce health-care resources.

Keywords: clinical practice change; guideline implementation; clinical guidelines; implementation strategies; economic evaluation; health-care decision making; health-care decision analysis. (Med Decis Making 2009; 29:207—216) (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2009
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X08327397 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:29:y:2009:i:2:p:207-216

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X08327397

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().