Optimal allocation of resources across four interventions for type 2 diabetes.

RTI Health Solutions, RTI, 3040 Cornwallis Road, P.O. Box 12194, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.
Medical Decision Making (Impact Factor: 2.27). 10/2002; 22(5 Suppl):S80-91. DOI: 10.1177/027298902237704
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Several interventions can be applied to prevent complications of type 2 diabetes. This article examines the optimal allocation of resources across 4 interventions to treat patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. The interventions are intensive glycemic control, intensified hypertension control, cholesterol reduction, and smoking cessation.
A linear programming model was designed to select sets of interventions to maximize quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), subject to varied budget and equity constraints.
For no additional cost, approximately 211,000 QALYs can be gained over the lifetimes of all persons newly diagnosed with diabetes by implementing interventions rather than standard care. With increased availability of funds, additional health benefits can be gained but with diminishing marginal returns. The impact of equity constraints is extensive compared to the solution with the same intervention costs and no equity constraint. Under the conditions modeled, intensified hypertension control and smoking cessation interventions were provided most often, and intensive glycemic control and cholesterol reduction interventions were provided less often.
A resource allocation model identifies trade-offs involved when imposing budget and equity constraints on care for individuals with newly diagnosed diabetes.

Download full-text


Available from: Anke Richter, Nov 26, 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The allocation problem in health care can be characterised as a mathematical programming problem but attempts to incorporate uncertainty in costs and effect have suffered from important limitations. A two-stage stochastic mathematical programming formulation is developed and applied to a numerical example to explore and demonstrate the implications of this more general and comprehensive approach. The solution to the allocation problem for different budgets, budgetary policies, and available actions are then demonstrated. This analysis is used to evaluate different budgetary policies and examine the adequacy of standard decision rules in cost-effectiveness analysis. The research decision is then considered alongside the allocation problem. This more general formulation demonstrates that the value of further research depends on: (i) the budgetary policy in place; (ii) the realisations revealed during the budget period; (iii) remedial actions that may be available; and (iv) variability in parameters values.
    Journal of Health Economics 12/2009; 29(1):170-81. DOI:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2009.11.005 · 2.25 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The standard decision rules of cost-effectiveness analysis either require the decision maker to set a threshold willingness to pay for additional health care or to set an overall fixed budget. In practice, neither are generally taken, but instead an arbitrary decision rule is followed which may not be consistent with the overall budget, lead to an allocation of resources which is less than optimal, and is unable to identify the programme which should be displaced at the margin. We show, using a policy- relevant example, how mathematical programming can be used as a generalisation of the standard decision rules. This approach allows us to incorporate important aspects of the decision into our framework that are not available if decision making is made using threshold values of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio alone. We are able to examine alternative budgetary rules about when expenditure can be incurred, and show the opportunity loss, in terms of health benefit forgone, of each budgetary rule. We show that indivisibility in a patient population and other equity concerns can be represented as constraints in the programme and we estimate the opportunity loss if these concerns are held for some patient populations, and for all patient populations.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The health care system in the United States is facing a myriad of problems, such as growing costs, an aging population, a shortage of nurses and physicians, differences in quality of care, a significant population of uninsured persons, and disparities in health care outcomes. All of these challenges affect access to health care, which is our focus. We draw attention to the impact of lack of access to care, we highlight programs aimed at increasing access to care, we review (academic) literature concerning access to care, we introduce the key challenges to improving access to care, and, most importantly, we discuss key research questions that can, and should, be addressed by operations researchers.