Healthcare Economics Assignment Sample
Report Section A
Introduction
One of the key goals of the study is to give a high-level summary, in order to provide policymakers with an overview of the current state of research in health-care economic assessment, of the research that has been conducted in this field. Educating or persuading an initially sceptical and reluctant world that economic evaluation is an important component of health care delivery has required a large amount of time and effort on behalf of health economists. An increase in the number of economic studies published in the field of health care has occurred, as has an increase in the demand for health economists as research partners. There has also been an increase in the use of cost-effectiveness as a criteria for allocating limited resources, to name a few of the most significant developments. This study’s findings reveal that the area of economic assessment in health care has now attained maturity, as shown by the findings. It is necessary to begin a whole new phase in order for the progress that has already been done to be sustainable in the long-term future.
Health problem
In order for economic assessment to achieve its full potential, health economists must do the vast bulk of the necessary effort. Researchers have discovered that rivastigmine may help individuals with moderate-to-severe Alzheimer’s disease by alleviating behavioural symptoms and lessening their reliance on psychotropic medications. The findings were published in a review. In addition, it is possible that this is associated with a reduction in the amount of stress put on professional carers. 34 Consequently, it is feasible that the total cost of AD will be lower as a consequence. Caregivers of patients with intermediate Alzheimer’s disease reported a decrease in the amount of time they spent caring for their patients of as much as 691 hours
Case overview
This material is being presented in the context of my own personal experience, which I hope you will find to be of use to you. As predicted, the field of health economics will face significant difficulties over the next decade, with this being notably obvious in the area of economic assessment. An in-depth discussion of the issue of health economic assessment will be provided in this article. … Finally, in order to evaluate the potential and actual contribution of economic assessment, the influence of economic evaluation on decision-making should be the last criterion; however, this is beyond the scope of this research. This study, in contrast to prior studies, has focused only on the relevance of the work done by health economists and others because they do what they do. Instead, past studies have emphasised the value of the work done by health economists and others because they do what they do. Our debate will begin with a look at the success of evidence-based health economics as a starting point. Following the completion of these comparisons, evidence-based health economics is assessed in order to determine whether or not it is capable of withstanding the scrutiny of the scientific community at large. Because there is a scarcity of data to support economic assessment procedures, a framework is developed to allow for a restricted study of a selection of these methods (Kabaniha,2019).
Clinical Indicators
A variety of aspects of the economic evaluation process are also examined, including the amount of time required and the approach used to conduct the assessment. When doing economic analysis, there are numerous levels at which it may be done, and the level at which it is finished has a significant impact on the manner in which it is presented to the general public. It is not known whether way of doing an economic review is the most efficient, nor when the most efficient time to conduct one is the most efficient time to conduct one. There are a number of diverse levels of economic research that are now accessible, but there are few details on how to allocate limited assessment resources among these different levels. As an example of a “fast and dirty” economic review, this piece is presented in order to demonstrate the possible function that pre-trial economic evaluations may play in a judicial action. Continued discussion of appropriate upper and lower bounds for health-care economic assessments is included in the next section (Vuong,2021).
Economic behavior
Moreover, the emphasis is made on the seeming disparity between models and what would later be recognised as universally recognised as trial-based techniques. It was agreed by the vast majority of participants that the two tactics work better together than their differences imply, and that the most important thing to remember is when and how to employ them successfully in tandem with one another. We are unable to offer a precise solution when it comes to determining the right ratio of trial-based to model-based processes in health care economic assessment due to our inadequate expertise of the subject matter.
There has been a great deal of study on evidence-based health economics, and it has been shown that many of the approaches used to analyse the economics of health care have a poor empirical foundation (Adil,2021).
Health Outcome (in the long-term)
This has led to a number of unresolved challenges in terms of how to conduct economic research of this kind as a consequence of the circumstances described above. Forecasts of future medical expenditures, discounting, and the monetary worth of health-care and health-related services and goods are only a few of the numerous topics included in the report’s many chapters (Pliskin2018).
Intervention
. People with moderately advanced Alzheimer’s disease were also evaluated, however the impact was less strong. This suggests that early treatments may be advantageous from a purely financial aspect. 35 With the use of rivastigmine, patients were kept out of the hospital before they progressed to severe stages of Alzheimer’s disease and required institutionalisation, while also seeing minor savings in direct costs of care for patients with Alzheimer’s disease. 18 Patients who began treatment at the early stages of their illness saw greater delays in disease development as well as greater cost savings as a result of their treatment. Patients who began treatment during the mild stages of Alzheimer’s disease had significant cost savings, which was mostly attributable to a delay in the progression to moderate Alzheimer’s disease. The delay in institutionalization during the first year of therapy for persons who began treatment during the intermediate stages of Alzheimer’s disease was the most significant cost-saving strategy.
Report Part B
Healthcare Evaluation
Aims of this publication include economic analysts, persons who undertake economic evaluations, as well as those who make use of the results reached as a consequence of such studies. Individuals engaged in the business of commissioning economic evaluations are not meant to read this document. In order to do this, it is necessary to raise the level of scepticism about the utility of economic analyses in the first place (Patel,2020).
The development of more realistic thinking about what may be done, as well as more attention given to some of the limitations of economic assessment and the areas where further research efforts are necessary, would be good for all participants in this emerging business. Following up on their previous criticism, Maynard and Sheldon published a new critique1 in which they analysed health economics within a much larger framework and discovered flaws that were consistent with the previous critique (Aslam,,2020).
Growing evidence-based medicine has emerged as a prominent issue of discussion among specialists when it comes to modern disputes about medical practise and policy (EBM) (Sánchez-Bayón,2022).
Rising focus being given in recent years to the importance of evidence-based medicine has driven many clinicians to declare that the most successful therapy has always been evidence-based, in reaction to the increasing attention being paid to it. This could be because new topics must be enthusiastically accepted every few years in order to provide opportunities for professional growth and development. It is possible that the topic’s current importance is related to the requirement for new topics to be enthusiastically accepted every few years in order to provide opportunities for professional growth and development. It is possible to draw some similarities between the present situation and that of other fields of health economics. A diverse spectrum of individuals from a variety of different backgrounds feel that health economics is scientifically sound and that it helps to the development of evidence-based medical practise.
It is widely believed by many health economics specialists that the health economist has a far more critical attitude toward medical outcomes than do clinical investigators, and that this belief is confirmed by the data. The economist’s relative ignorance, which results in basic worries, or the economist’s lack of a chosen answer before commencing an assessment might all play a role in creating this situation, despite the fact that any of these factors could play a role (Lindner,2019).
With the use of a number of case studies, this course will investigate the premise that health economics is and has always been an evidence-based science in which to conduct its research. Understanding what evidence-based health economics is and how it functions is essential before we can comprehend how and where it might be used to benefit society in general. The following is the definition of evidence-based health economics:
current literature
What is the cost-effectiveness and public benefit of EBM’s assertions, as well as how do they assist the general public, are the topics of this article. An other way of saying it is that we don’t have a definitive conclusion. Despite the fact that EBM places a major focus on effectiveness, it does not take into account how many resources are being used or how much money is being saved as a result of the intervention. This is really crucial for you to understand.
In the second segment, we’ll look at when and how we should make an attempt to modify our current habits and behaviours (for example, by introducing guidelines). The employment of this approach might prove to be a more cost-effective use of resources in some instances; but, due to the huge number of parties involved, it is doubtful that they would agree on and implement this recommendation without incurring extra expenditures. When the best evidence-based strategy is such an inefficient use of resources that it is not worth the effort to adopt, it may be necessary to adjust current practises in order to get better outcomes. This is known as the efficiency trap. There are also a variety of approaches to bringing about change that should be explored, each with its own set of costs and ramifications that should be taken into account when determining the appropriate course of action to be followed in any given situation. Because this is a novel area in the field of health economics that has never been explored previously, there is a great opportunity to make a significant contribution.
There is a limited amount of past experience that health economics may rely on when it comes to addressing implementation issues in the field of medicine. Because the writers want to emphasise how generalizable the conclusions are, rather than because there is a lack of interest in the issue, it is possible that there is a lack of attention devoted to implementation in economic assessments (Vuong,2018).
Budgets and Expenditure
The presence of issues when a completely new system is integrated into an existing system environment is not uncommon at this point.
It is estimated that there are around 690 000 dementia patients in England, with 565 000 of them receiving unpaid or community care, and the remaining remaining in a care facility, according to the Alzheimer’s Society. Unpaid care would account for 42 percent (£10.1 billion) of the overall cost of dementia in England in 2015, according to projections. The costs of social care (£10.2 billion) are more than three times higher than the costs of health care (£3.8 billion) combined. Amount user and family contributions to the cost of social care overall £6.2 billion, with the government providing £4.0 billion (39.4%) to the total cost. Alzheimer’s disease is predicted to cost the United Kingdom £3.2 billion per year in mild dementia, £6.9 billion per year in intermediate dementia, and £14.1 billion per year in severe dementia, according to government estimates. In the United Kingdom, the average annual costs for mild, moderate, and severe dementia are £24,400, £27,450, and £46,050, respectively, per person and per year of care.
In 2015, we project that the total annual cost of dementia in England would be £24.2 billion, which is a $2 billion increase over the previous estimate for the same year. This is based on newly available data and improved modelling.
The care of persons suffering from dementia is greatly aided by unpaid carers, such as family members and other loved ones. A growing number of people are living longer lives, which means that the already large demand for and expenditures on unpaid care are expected to grow much more in the future, requiring the need for better support for carers.
When it comes to the economic burden of dementia, the social care business suffers more than the health-care industry, and people suffering from more severe dementia suffer even more. Guaranteeing that people with dementia and their families get high-quality care in a timely way is vital, and this may be accomplished through financing and delivering social care services in an equitable and effective manner. Economic assessments should be held to greater criteria in terms of the quality of the data on which they are based, it is currently being debated in the academic community whether they should be held to higher standards or not. Despite the fact that most health economists are pragmatic by nature, the vast majority of them are willing to utilise any data they can get their hands on in order to advance the subject of health economics forward. As a result, even if the vast majority of economic judgments fail the “RCT test,” this does not necessarily imply that the subject of health economics is founded on shaky empirical foundations (Lindner,2020).
Analysis
Continue to carry out the responsibilities that have been put in their hands by the court. People who do not have a formal statistical background seldom criticise a statistician’s power estimate. In their respective disciplines, it is clinicians, not health economists, who are in charge of making clinical decisions. If a health economist becomes available, there is broad agreement that he or she should be assigned to the function of “health economics” if one becomes available. What approximate proportion of this trust in the health economist is based on a belief that the economist is employing scientifically sound techniques, and what approximate proportion of this belief is supported by evidence, is unknown (Cohen,2022).
It is more important that I redirect my focus away from the first question at this moment than it is that I answer it.
According to those in the field of health economics, many of the methodologies that are often utilised have a poor empirical foundation that is not well supported by the literature, and this is typically true. As a result, the World Health Organization believes that procedures such as the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), cost-benefit analysis, and discounting are examples of approaches that have gained widespread acceptance despite the fact that their evidence-based bases have been called into question in the past (Snyder,2018).
Report Section C
Facilitators
Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is the most frequent kind of dementia in the elderly population. Gradual, degenerative brain disease characterised by the progressive degradation of cognitive, behavioural, and functional abilities that happens over a long period of time. Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a typical example of a disease that occurs as a result of growing older. Slowly but steadily, the situation worsens, finally resulting in a loss of functional abilities and, eventually, complete reliance. In recent years, dementias and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) have received a great deal of attention in both clinical practise and medical research, owing to the disproportionate growth in the number of elderly citizens worldwide (65 years and older). The repercussions for society, the economy, and health-care delivery are substantial. There are significant economic ramifications for the health-care system from Alzheimer’s disease (AD), particularly when considering the expenditures devoted to prevent, diagnose, treat, and manage dementia. Alzheimer’s disease has a social impact that goes beyond the financial costs associated with the condition. A multitude of aspects of people’s life are affected by the condition, including their financial well-being, relationships with family members, and professional pursuits. It is the focus of this analysis to examine the economic impact of Alzheimer’s disease on health-care systems and society as a whole.
As people age, they are more prone to developing dementias, including Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The prevalence rate of Alzheimer’s disease doubles every five years among people aged 65 to 69, and various epidemiological studies have revealed that the prevalence rate increases exponentially with age, starting at 1.5 to 2.5 percent in the 65-69 age group and reaching nearly 40 percent in the 90-94 age group. 1,2 According to projections made by the World Health Organization (WHO), the proportion of people over the age of 65 is predicted to climb from 6.8 percent in 2000 to 16.2 percent by 2050, up from 6.8 percent in 2000. 3 As a result, assuming nothing changes in the incidence, mortality, or availability of preventive or curative medicines for these disorders, the prevalence of dementia in 2005 (24 million) is expected to rise to 81 million by 2040, an increase from the current level of 24 million. 4 Alzheimer’s disease (AD) epidemiology shows that the social and economic burden of dementias will rise considerably in both industrialised and developing countries over the next few decades, regardless of where they originate (Huang,2022).
Recommendations
In order to establish a baseline of understanding, it is critical to recognise that health economists are not the only ones that use models to analyse difficulties. 15 Researchers must first prove the relevance of intermediate findings for long-term outcomes before proceeding to the next step in order to go beyond efficacy and into effectiveness. These are just a handful of the reasons why this is necessary in the first place. To put it another way, in the pharmaceutical sector, modelling clinical outcomes is standard operating procedure. It is also worth noting that, when doing a randomised controlled trial in conjunction with an economic review, the necessity for any modelling is not always eliminated from the picture as previously thought. For example, it is possible that quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) will be assessed outside of the setting of a clinical study. The findings of an economic assessment are revised when the results of an RCT are merged, which is another usual situation. The conclusions of an economic assessment are rewritten to account for changes in practise settings and geographic regions, which is another common scenario.
Conclusion
The intended findings may be achieved through modelling rather than by re-running the experiment in a variety of scenarios.
The fact that modelling motivates us to think what may happen if we don’t take action right now is also one of the most compelling arguments in favour of it. The use of the best available facts to offer advise when we are unclear whether or not a particular action is a good idea seems to be an effective strategy on the surface. There are, however, a number of drawbacks to using this strategy. Before adopting any model, it is important to understand the limits of the data being utilised and the modelling technique being employed in order to avoid putting too much trust on the conclusions reached by the model.
References
Adil, S.M., Liu, B., Charalambous, L.T., Kiyani, M., Gramer, R., Swisher, C.B., Verbick, L.Z., McCabe, A., Parente, B.A., Pagadala, P. and Lad, S.P., 2019. Healthcare economics of hydrocephalus after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage in the United States. Translational Stroke Research, 10(6), pp.650-663.
Aslam, M.Z., Trail, M., Cassell III, A.K., Khan, A.B. and Payne, S., 2022. Establishing a sustainable healthcare environment in low‐and middle‐income countries. BJU international, 129(2), pp.134-142.
Cohen, D. and Flood, C., 2022. Health economics. In Health Studies (pp. 269-294). Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore.
Cohen, D. and Flood, C., 2022. Health economics. In Health Studies (pp. 269-294). Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore.
Hamada, O., Tsutsumi, T., Tsunemitsu, A., Fukui, T., Shimokawa, T. and Imanaka, Y., 2019. Impact of the hospitalist system in Japan on the quality of care and healthcare economics. Internal Medicine, 58(23), pp.3385-3391.
Huang, C.H., Batarseh, F.A., Boueiz, A., Kulkarni, A., Su, P.H. and Aman, J., 2021. Measuring outcomes in healthcare economics using Artificial Intelligence: With application to resource management. Data & Policy, 3.
Kabaniha, G.A., Ataguba, J.E.O. and Kutzin, J., 2020. Global Healthcare Financing: Economics, Methods, and Strategies for Sustainable Healthcare. Handbook of global health, pp.1-42.
Lindner, S.M., McNeely, C.A. and Amin, A.P., 2020. The Value of Transradial: Impact on Patient Satisfaction and Healthcare Economics. Interventional cardiology clinics, 9(1), p.107.
Lindner, S.M., McNeely, C.A. and Amin, A.P., 2020. The Value of Transradial: Impact on Patient Satisfaction and Healthcare Economics. Interventional cardiology clinics, 9(1), p.107.
Martin, J.J., 2020. Essays on Healthcare Economics. Columbia University.
Patel, N., 2020. Impact on dental economics and dental healthcare utilization in COVID-19: an exploratory study. Journal of Advanced Oral Research, 11(2), pp.128-136.
Pliskin, N.H., 2018. The economics of healthcare shape the practice of neuropsychology in the era of integrated healthcare. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 33(3), pp.260-262.
Sánchez-Bayón, A., González-Arnedo, E. and Andreu-Escario, Á., 2022. Spanish Healthcare Sector Management in the COVID-19 Crisis Under the Perspective of Austrian Economics and New-Institutional Economics. Frontiers in Public Health, 10.
Sánchez-Bayón, A., González-Arnedo, E. and Andreu-Escario, Á., 2022. Spanish Healthcare Sector Management in the COVID-19 Crisis Under the Perspective of Austrian Economics and New-Institutional Economics. Frontiers in Public Health, 10.
Snyder, C.M. and Tremblay, V.J., 2018. Introduction to the Special Issue on “The Intersection Between Industrial Organization and Healthcare Economics”. Review of Industrial Organization, 53(1), pp.1-6.
Sukhareva, I.A., Tretyakova, O.S. and Mabiala, G., 2020. HEALTHCARE ECONOMICS (Principles and Fundamentals).
Vuong, Q.H., Ho, T.M., Nguyen, H.K. and Vuong, T.T., 2018. Healthcare consumers’ sensitivity to costs: A reflection on behavioural economics from an emerging market. Palgrave Communications, 4(1), pp.1-10.
Vuong, Q.H., Ho, T.M., Nguyen, H.K. and Vuong, T.T., 2018. Healthcare consumers’ sensitivity to costs: A reflection on behavioural economics from an emerging market. Palgrave Communications, 4(1), pp.1-10.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Know more about UniqueSubmission’s other writing services:
