Search

Waste management systems have developed in recent years toward the adoption of sustainable management principles and practices, such as circular economy, zero waste, resource efficiency, waste avoidance, re-use, and recycling. Nevertheless, landfills continue to be used for waste disposal despite their risks related to contamination and effects on urban development. Most research on landfills focuses on their operational and technical aspects, while the performance and cost efficiency in managing landfills is less commonly studied, especially their post-closure management. However, improving efficiency is very relevant in the context of scarce public sector resources. This paper, therefore, analyzes the efficiency of post-closure management of landfills. Drawing on agency and stewardship theories, we focus on the difference in efficiency between public and private management of post-closure landfills. We use a linear mixed regression model to analyze data from 2015 to 2018 relating to 54 landfills (79% of which are privately managed) in the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy. The results show that public management is more efficient than private management. Results contribute to defining drivers of cost and confirming a disparity in the performance of private and public management. Our results cast doubt on the assumption, which is prevalent in new public management theory, that private operators are more efficient than public ones. We conclude by highlighting that to reach efficiency, it is better to increase the effectiveness of regulation in terms of value for money, without pre-determined preferences for the type of management., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Occupational therapists recommending home modifications in Australia are often required by funding bodies to consider 'value' and 'value for money' (VFM); however, clear guidance on how to define and apply these concepts is not always provided. This paper reports on a qualitative study examining how the concepts of value and VFM are currently understood and operationalised by occupational therapists in Australian home modification practice, with the aim of positively contributing to both policy and practice in this area., Methods: The study utilised constructivist grounded theory to collect and analyse qualitative data from 20 occupational therapists who were currently working across Australia and had professional experience in home modifications., Findings: The grounded theory that was derived from the analysis highlights the unique position that occupational therapists occupy in home modification work as they strive to align the values of different stakeholders to create solutions that all consider to be valuable. In the absence of consistent frameworks or methods for determining value and VFM, evidence also emerged of occupational therapists using a range of individual approaches such as using formal and informal care as metrics, cheapest option approaches, and comparative costing., Conclusion: In addition to a clear need for consistent and transparent approaches to understanding and operationalising VFM in home modifications, there is also a need for further investigation into the value systems that underpin this work. A conceptualisation of occupational therapists as street-level policy agents has proven useful here as it highlights the position occupational therapists occupy, enacting, making, and, at times, challenging policy in day-to-day practice as they work to align the values of the various stakeholders., (© 2022 The Authors. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Occupational Therapy Australia.)

Research for development (R4D) funding is increasingly expected to demonstrate value for money (VfM). However, the dominance of positivist approaches to evaluating VfM, such as cost-benefit analysis, do not fully account for the complexity of R4D funds and risk undermining efforts to contribute to transformational development. This paper posits an alternative approach to evaluating VfM, using the UK's Global Challenges Research Fund and the Newton Fund as case studies. Based on a constructivist approach to valuing outcomes, this approach applies a collaboratively developed rubric-based peer review to a sample of projects. This is more appropriate for the complexity of R4D interventions, particularly when considering uncertain and emergent outcomes over a long timeframe. This approach could be adapted to other complex interventions, demonstrating that our options are not merely "CBA or the highway" and there are indeed alternative routes to evaluating VfM., Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1057/s41287-022-00565-7., Competing Interests: Conflict of interestI am reporting that I was previously an employee of UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), sponsored by BEIS; the work reported in this article was conducted while I was an employee of UKRI. I am no longer a UKRI employee and do not have a financial interest in publishing this paper., (© European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI) 2022, Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.)

Background: A key barrier to cervical cancer elimination in China is low human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake, which is limited by supply constraints, high prices, and restriction to two/three-dose schedule. We explored optimal vaccination strategies for maximizing health and economic benefits accommodated to different supply and dose schedules., Methods: We evaluated different HPV vaccine strategies under 4 scenarios with different assumptions about vaccine availability and dose schedules. Each strategy involved different vaccine types, target ages, and modes of delivery. We used a previously validated transmission model to assess the health impact (cervical cancer cases averted), efficiency (number of doses needed to be given to prevent one case of cervical cancer [NND]), and value for money (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] and return on investment [ROI]) of different strategies in Chinese females over a 100-year time horizon. All costs are expressed in 2021 dollars. We adopted a societal perspective and discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs and benefits by 3% annually for cost-effectiveness analysis and ROI calculation., Findings: In a supply-constrained and on-label use scenario, compared with no vaccination, two-dose routine vaccination of 14-year-olds would be the optimal, cost-saving strategy for a future national program (NNDs: 150-220, net cost saving: $15 164 million-$22 034 million, ROIs: 7-14, depending on vaccine type). If the one-dose schedule recommended by WHO is permitted in China, then reallocating the second dose from the routine cohorts to add a catch-up vaccination at 20-year-olds would be the most efficient strategy (NNDs: 73-107), and would be cost-saving compared with routine one-dose vaccination only (net cost saving: $4127 million-$6035 million, ROIs: 19-37). When supply constraints are lifted, scaling up vaccination in older females to 26 years could further expand the health benefits and still be cost-saving compared to maintaining the optimal vaccination strategy in the supply-constrained context., Interpretation: Our study provides timely evidence for the current and future HPV vaccination strategy planning in China, and may also be of value to other countries with supply and dose restrictions., Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (CIFMS)., Competing Interests: YQ and FZ report grants from GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Merck & Co, and Xiamen Innovax Biotech to their institution, to undertake clinical trials on the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine. Other co-authors declare no competing interests., (© 2022 The Author(s).)

This study aimed to examine the government's cost efficiency considering the high-risk/high-return mechanism of PPP. Faced with increasing demand but with limited budget, the Korean government has relied on the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) to provide waste treatment services for the last couple of decades to expand fiscal space. However, most of waste treatment facilities projects have been promoted using the BTO (Build-Transfer-Operate) method with high rate of return due to the demand risk that is transferred to the private. We performed a conversion analysis of a BTO to a BTL (Build-Transfer-Lease) method, in which demand risk is borne by the government, for 18 PPP waste treatment cases with actual operation records. The result of comparing the life-cycle costs of government in employing each project method shows that the BTL can provide 5.26% of Value for Money (VfM) compared to the BTO as the government takes the demand risk and lowers the required rate of return of the private. This implies that transferring the demand risk to the private sector may not always be the best option for the government. From the government's perspective, instead of transferring the demand risk to the private and providing a high rate of return, the government can retain the demand risk and reduce the rate of return, and it can be fiscally more advantageous considering the cost structure of each PPP method. Through Korean PPP waste treatment cases, this study suggests that policy makers who implement PPP should consider the government's strategic risk sharing by understanding the predictability of demand and the nature of cost structure of each PPP method., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Evaluations of policies and programs often use a theory of change to articulate how the intervention is intended to function and the mechanisms by which it is supposed to generate outcomes. When an evaluation includes cost and efficiency considerations, economic and other concepts can be added to a theory of change to articulate a theory of value creation that articulates the mechanisms by which the intervention should use resources efficiently, effectively and create sufficient value to justify the resource use. This paper introduces some theories of value creation that are often implicit in program designs. Making these theories explicit can support clearer evaluative thinking about value for money - including specification of criteria and standards that are aligned with the theory, methods of inquiry that test the theory, and well-reasoned judgements that answer evaluative questions about value for money. Implications for evaluation practice will be discussed., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The achievement of Universal Health Coverage, including quality services, is high on the international agenda. Cambodia aims to expand social health protection and is committed to improving the healthcare service quality. We review the country context and propose five policy approaches to accelerate progress on healthcare quality improvement in Cambodia. These approaches aim to augment the profile and continued focus on quality while leveraging and optimizing existing systems to incentivize improvements and increase value for money.

Our vision about breast cancer quality care within a global health framework was recently published by Oxford University Press. The aim of our work was to reflect on the potential to achieve a world-wide improvement in quality care, assessing value for money. The population-based survival estimates from the CONCORD programme and the Breast Health Global Initiative (BHGI) are valuable tools for this global effort. Because cancer care delivery is becoming unsustainable in many countries assessing healthcare value for the cost is becoming increasingly important. Recommendations are made for better global quality care for patients with breast cancer., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author (s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

Background: Global health priority setting increasingly focuses on understanding the functioning of health systems and on how they can be strengthened. Beyond vertical programs, health systems research should examine system-wide delivery platforms (e.g. health facilities) and operational elements (e.g. supply chains) as primary units of study and evaluation., Methods: We use dynamical system methods to develop a simple analytical model for the supply chain of a low-income country's health system. In doing so, we emphasize the dynamic links that integrate the supply chain within other elements of the health system; and we examine how the evolution over time of such connections would affect drug delivery, following the implementation of selected interventions (e.g. enhancing road networks, expanding workforce). We also test feedback loops and forecasts to study the potential impact of setting up a digital system for tracking drug delivery to prevent drug stockout and expiration., Results: Numerical simulations that capture a range of supply chain scenarios demonstrate the impact of different health system strengthening interventions on drug stock levels within health facilities. Our mathematical modeling also points to how implementing a digital drug tracking system could help anticipate and prevent drug stockout and expiration., Conclusion: Our mathematical model of drug supply chain delivery represents an important component toward the development of comprehensive quantitative frameworks that aim at describing health systems as complex dynamical systems. Such models can help predict how investments in system-wide interventions, like strengthening drug supply chains in low-income settings, may improve population health outcomes.

Background: Many treatments developed for rare diseases will have an Orphan Medicinal Product (OMP) designation, indicating that they are likely to deliver benefit in an area of high unmet need. Their approval may be based on a small or uncontrolled trial, as randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of sufficient size are often difficult to conduct, or repeat, as a result of the rarity of the condition, sparsity of patients, or for ethical reasons. Furthermore, many products are given a conditional marketing authorisation, requiring additional evidence to be collected after product launch. This is even more challenging with the advent of advanced therapeutic medicinal products, which use novel scientific approaches like gene or somatic cell therapy., Issue: Given the high unmet need associated with these products, there is pressure for Health Technology Assessment (HTA)/reimbursement bodies to enable rapid access to effective treatments. However, there is often only limited evidence available for assessment., Methods: TRUST4RD proposes an approach to identify uncertainties of most concern for decision-makers by developing an iterative and informed dialogue amongst stakeholders (including manufacturers, clinicians, patients, regulatory- and HTA agencies and payers), so that potential approaches to resolution can be discussed. As evidence is generated, uncertainties are reviewed and prioritised, and evidence-generation plans revised or clarified accordingly. The aim is to develop - both pre- and post HTA submission - a better understanding of evidence requirements versus evidence-generation trade-offs as an evidence base grows and the potential value of a product becomes clearer., Conclusion: TRUST4RD presents guidance on defining uncertainties and evidence gaps in the assessment of value and value for money of specialised treatments for rare diseases. It also provides guidance on the potential of Real World Evidence (RWE) to help address such uncertainties, including the typology of evidence uncertainties, the importance of different uncertainties and the data sources available to address them before and after HTA submission. In making use of the guidance, authorisation and reimbursement discussions on such treatments can be embedded in an evidence-rich context, thereby ensuring value to all parties, particularly to patients.

Treatment and prevention efforts guided by psychological theory, research, and practice can have outcomes of greater value than the resources consumed by those efforts-and outcomes superior to those attainable by other means, often at lower costs. How can we make this hope true more often, for more of the clients who need our services, despite severe resource constraints? Routinely reporting the costs, effectiveness, and benefits of psychological interventions from client, practitioner, and societal perspectives is only a beginning. We also need to use descriptive and inferential statistics to measure, report, and analyze the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of our interventions to discover the strongest determinants of intervention costs and outcomes. The emerging literature on cost-inclusive research in psychology suggests that delivery systems are one primary determinant of costs and outcomes of most interventions, as are the psychological techniques applied.

Value for Money (VfM) is an evaluative question about the merit, worth, and significance of resource use in social programs. Although VfM is a critical component of evidence-based programming, it is often overlooked or avoided by evaluators and decision-makers. A framework for evaluating VfM across the dimensions of economy, effectiveness, efficiency, and equity has emerged in response to limitations of traditional economic evaluation. This framework for assessing VfM integrates methods for engaging stakeholders in evaluative thinking to increase acceptance and utilization of evaluations that address questions of resource use. In this review, we synthesize literature on the VfM framework and position it within a broader theory of Utilization-Focused Evaluation (UFE). We then examine mechanisms through which the VfM framework may contribute to increased evaluation use. Finally, we outline avenues for future research on VfM evaluation., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Lay health workers have been utilized to deliver health promotion programmes in a variety of settings. However, few studies have sought to determine whether these programmes represent value for money, particularly in a UK context. The present study involved an economic evaluation of Wellbeing for Life, an integrated health and wellbeing service in northern England. The service combined one-to-one interventions delivered by lay health workers (known as health trainers), group wellbeing interventions, volunteering opportunities and other community development activities. Value for money was assessed using an established economic model developed with input from a panel of commissioners and providers, and the main data source was the national health trainer data collection and reporting system. Between June 2015 and January 2017, behaviour change outcomes (i.e. whether client goals in relation to diet, physical activity, smoking or other behaviours, had been achieved) were recorded for 2433 of the 3179 individuals who accessed one-to-one interventions. The level of achievement observed gave an estimated total health gain of 287.7 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). In addition, there were 4669 health-promoting events, five asset mapping projects and 1595 occurrences of signposting to other services. Combining the value of individual behaviour change with the value of these additional activities gave an overall net cost per QALY gained of £3900 and a total estimated societal value of at least £3.45 for every £1 spent on the service. These results suggest that the Wellbeing for Life service offered good value for money. Further research is needed to systematically and comprehensively determine the societal value of similar holistic, asset-based and lay-led approaches., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In recent times, there has been an increasing drive to demonstrate value for money (VfM) for investments made in public health globally. However, there is paucity of information on practical insights and best practices that have helped implementing organisations to successfully embed VfM in practice for programming and evaluation. In this article, we discuss strengths and weaknesses of approaches that been used and insights on best practices to manage for, demonstrate, and compare VfM, using a health pooled fund programme implemented in conflict-affected South Sudan as case study supported by evidence reported in the literature while critiquing adequacy of the available approaches in this setting. An expanded and iterative process framework to guide VfM embedding for health programming and evaluation is then proposed. In doing so, this article provides a very relevant one-stop source for critical insight into how to embed VfM in practice. Uptake and scale-up of the proposed framework can be essential in improving VfM and aid effectiveness which will ultimately contribute to progress towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Cost-effectiveness analysis is increasingly relevant in humanitarian action. The cost of response has increased exponentially in the past decade, alongside concurrent donor budget restrictions. However, there remains limited comprehension and application of these methods in this field. This paper documents methods developed for use within Action Against Hunger, an international humanitarian organisation, in response to a lack of understanding of this topic within the humanitarian community and limited evidence of the cost-effectiveness of humanitarian action. These methods encompass costs to both implementing institutions and participating communities. Activity-based cost analyses are conducted to assess resources per programme activity. Cost-effectiveness is evaluated using successful programme outcomes, and uncertainty is appraised via sensitivity analysis. This paper aims to advance knowledge, stimulate discussion, and promote the adoption of cost-effectiveness methods for building the evidence base for humanitarian action, including consideration of community costs, to enable analytical outputs that are useful for managers and policymakers alike., (© 2019 The Author(s). Disasters © Overseas Development Institute, 2019.)

Introduction: Emergency obstetric care (EmOC) training is considered a key strategy for reducing maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. Although generally considered effective, there is minimal evidence on the broader social impact and/or value-for-money (VfM). This study assessed the social impact and VfM of EmOC training in Kenya using social return on investment (SROI) methodology., Methods: Mixed-methods approach was used, including interviews (n=21), focus group discussions (n=18) incorporating a value game, secondary data analysis and literature review, to obtain all relevant data for the SROI analysis. Findings were incorporated into the impact map and used to estimate the SROI ratio. Sensitivity analyses were done to test assumptions., Results: Trained healthcare providers, women and their babies who received care from those providers were identified as primary beneficiaries. EmOC training led to improved knowledge and skills and improved attitudes towards patients. However, increased workload was reported as a negative outcome by some healthcare providers. Women who received care expected and experienced positive outcomes including reduced maternal and newborn morbidity and mortality. After accounting for external influences, the total social impact for 93 5-day EmOC training workshops over a 1-year period was valued at I$9.5 million, with women benefitting the most from the intervention (73%). Total direct implementation cost was I$745 000 for 2965 healthcare providers trained. The cost per trained healthcare provider per day was I$50.23 and SROI ratio was 12.74:1. Based on multiple one-way sensitivity analyses, EmOC training guaranteed VfM in all scenarios except when trainers were paid consultancy fees and the least amount of training outcomes occurred., Conclusion: EmOC training workshops are a worthwhile investment. The implementation approach influences how much VfM is achieved. The use of volunteer facilitators, particularly those based locally, to deliver EmOC training is a critical driver in increasing social impact and achieving VfM for investments made., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Objectives: Healthcare budgets are limited, and therefore, research funds should be wisely allocated to ensure high-quality, useful and cost-effective research. We aimed to critically review the criteria considered by major Australian organisations in prioritising and selecting health research projects for funding., Methods: We reviewed all grant schemes listed on the Australian Competitive Grants Register that were health-related, active in 2017 and with publicly available selection criteria on the funders' websites. Data extracted included scheme name, funding organisation, selection criteria and the relative weight assigned to each criterion. Selection criteria were grouped into five representative domains: relevance, appropriateness, significance, feasibility (including team quality) and cost-effectiveness (ie, value for money)., Results: Thirty-six schemes were included from 158 identified. One-half of the schemes were under the National Health and Medical Research Council. The most commonly used criteria were research team quality and capability (94%), research plan clarity (94%), scientific quality (92%) and research impact (92%). Criteria considered less commonly were existing knowledge (22%), fostering collaboration (22%), research environment (19%), value for money (14%), disease burden (8%) and ethical/moral considerations (3%). In terms of representative domains, relevance was considered in 72% of the schemes, appropriateness in 92%, significance in 94%, feasibility in 100% and cost-effectiveness in 17%. The relative weights for the selection criteria varied across schemes with 5%-30% for relevance, 20%-60% for each appropriateness and significance, 20%-75% for feasibility and 15%-33% for cost-effectiveness., Conclusions: In selecting research projects for funding, Australian research organisations focus largely on research appropriateness, significance and feasibility; however, value for money is most often overlooked. Research funding decisions should include an assessment of value for money in order to maximise return on research investment., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Delivering Reproductive Health Results(DRHR) programme used social franchising (SF) and social marketing (SM) approaches to increase the supply of high quality family planning services in underserved areas of Pakistan. We assessed the costs, cost-efficiency and cost-effectiveness of DRHR to understand the value for money of these approaches., Methods: Financial and economic programme costs were calculated. Costs to individual users were captured in a pre-post survey. The cost per couple years of protection (CYP) and cost per new user were estimated as indicators of cost efficiency. For the cost-effectiveness analysis we estimated the cost per clinical outcome averted and the cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted., Results: Approximately £20 million were spent through the DRHR programme between July 2012 and September 2015 on commodities and services representing nearly four million CYPs. Based on programme data, the cumulative cost-efficiency of the entire DRHR programme was £4.8 per CYP. DRHR activities would avert one DALY at the cost of £20. Financial access indicators generally improved in programme areas, but the magnitude of progress varies across indicators., Conclusions: The SF and SM approaches adopted in DRHR appear to be cost effective relative to comparable reproductive health programmes. This paper adds to the limited evidence on the cost-effectiveness of different models of reproductive health care provision in low- and middle-income settings. Further studies are needed to nuance the understanding of the determinants of impact and value for money of SF and SM., Competing Interests: OPM Ethical Review Committee (ERC) reviewed and approved this research project. Local institutional approval was obtained from Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (PBS). All the respondents provided informed consent prior to data collection.Not applicable.The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Background: Differences in payer evaluation and coverage of pharmaceuticals and medical procedures suggest that coverage may differ for medications and procedures independent of their clinical benefit. We hypothesized that coverage for medications is more restricted than corresponding coverage for nonmedication interventions., Methods: We included top-selling medications and highly utilized procedures. For each intervention-indication pair, we classified value in terms of cost-effectiveness (incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year), as reported by the Tufts Medical Center Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry. For each intervention-indication pair and for each of 10 large payers, we classified coverage, when available, as either "more restrictive" or as "not more restrictive," compared with a benchmark. The benchmark reflected the US Food and Drug Administration label information, when available, or pertinent clinical guidelines. We compared coverage policies and the benchmark in terms of step edits and clinical restrictions. Finally, we regressed coverage restrictiveness against intervention type (medication or nonmedication), controlling for value (cost-effectiveness more or less favorable than a designated threshold)., Results: We identified 392 medication and 185 procedure coverage decisions. A total of 26.3% of the medication coverage and 38.4% of the procedure coverage decisions were more restrictive than their corresponding benchmarks. After controlling for value, the odds of being more restrictive were 42% lower for medications than for procedures. Including unfavorable tier placement in the definition of "more restrictive" greatly increased the proportion of medication coverage decisions classified as "more restrictive" and reversed our findings., Conclusions: Therapy access depends on factors other than cost and clinical benefit, suggesting potential health care system inefficiency., (Copyright © 2018 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective Peer support for people with dementia and carers is routinely advocated in national strategies and policy as a post-diagnostic intervention. However there is limited evidence to demonstrate the value these groups offer. This study looked at three dementia peer support groups in South London to evaluate what outcomes they produce and how much social value they create in relation to the cost of investment. Methods A Social Return on Investment (SROI) analysis was undertaken, which involves collecting data on the inputs, outputs and outcomes of an intervention, which are put into a formula, the end result being a SROI ratio showing how much social value is created per £1 of investment. Results Findings showed the three groups created social value ranging from £1.17 to £5.18 for every pound (£) of investment, dependent on the design and structure of the group. Key outcomes for people with dementia were mental stimulation and a reduction in loneliness and isolation. Carers reported a reduction in stress and burden of care. Volunteers cited an increased knowledge of dementia. Conclusions This study has shown that peer groups for people with dementia produce a social value greater than the cost of investment which provides encouraging evidence for those looking to commission, invest, set up or evaluate peer support groups for people with dementia and carers. Beyond the SROI ratio, this study has shown these groups create beneficial outcomes not only for the group members but also more widely for their carers and the group volunteers.

With aid budgets shrinking in richer countries and more money for healthcare becoming available from domestic sources in poorer ones, the rhetoric of value for money or improved efficiency of aid spending is increasing. Taking healthcare as one example, we discuss the need for and potential benefits of (and obstacles to) the establishment of a national institute for aid effectiveness. In the case of the UK, such an institute would help improve development spending decisions made by DFID, the country's aid agency, as well as by the various multilaterals, such as the Global Fund, through which British aid monies is channelled. It could and should also help countries becoming increasingly independent from aid build their own capacity to make sure their own resources go further in terms of health outcomes and more equitable distribution. Such an undertaking will not be easy given deep suspicion amongst development experts towards economists and arguments for improving efficiency. We argue that it is exactly because needs matter that those who make spending decisions must consider the needs not being met when a priority requires that finite resources are diverted elsewhere. These chosen unmet needs are the true costs; they are lost health. They must be considered, and should be minimised and must therefore be measured. Such exposition of the trade-offs of competing investment options can help inform an array of old and newer development tools, from strategic purchasing and pricing negotiations for healthcare products to performance based contracts and innovative financing tools for programmatic interventions., Competing Interests: Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

This article outlines the historical development of health economics and its present role in oncology related health technology assessments (HTAs). Despite concerns about the prices and immediate costs of new anticancer medicines for indications such as breast cancer overall spending on such treatments is affordable and offers long term value for money in countries such as the US, Canada and those of Western Europe. Oncologists wishing to protect the interests of current and future patients with both advanced and earlier stage cancers may be regarded as having a responsibility to understand the nature of health economic evaluations, and to be actively involved in decisions affecting access to current treatments and future levels of investment in incrementally improving therapies., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The 2009 A/H1N1 influenza pandemic generated additional data and triggered new studies that opened debate over the optimal strategy for handling a pandemic. The lessons-learned documents from the World Health Organization show the need for a cost estimation of the pandemic response during the risk-assessment phase. Several years after the crisis, what conclusions can we draw from this field of research?, Objective: The main objective of this article was to provide an analysis of the studies that present cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit analyses for A/H1N1 pandemic interventions since 2009 and to identify which measures seem most cost-effective., Methods: We reviewed 18 academic articles that provide cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit analyses for A/H1N1 pandemic interventions since 2009. Our review converts the studies' results into a cost-utility measure (cost per disability-adjusted life-year or quality-adjusted life-year) and presents the contexts of severity and fatality., Results: The existing studies suggest that hospital quarantine, vaccination, and usage of the antiviral stockpile are highly cost-effective, even for mild pandemics. However, school closures, antiviral treatments, and social distancing may not qualify as efficient measures, for a virus like 2009's H1N1 and a willingness-to-pay threshold of $45,000 per disability-adjusted life-year. Such interventions may become cost-effective for severe crises., Conclusions: This study helps to shed light on the cost-utility of various interventions, and may support decision making, among other criteria, for future pandemics. Nonetheless, one should consider these results carefully, considering these may not apply to a specific crisis or country, and a dedicated cost-effectiveness assessment should be conducted at the time., (Copyright © 2017 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Public spending on external consultancies, particularly within the health sector, is highly controversial in many countries. Yet, despite the apparently large sums of money involved, there is little international analysis surrounding the scope of activities of consultants, meaning there is little understanding of how much is spent, for what purpose and with what result. This paper examines spending on external consultancies in each of New Zealand's 20 District Health Boards (DHB). Using evidence obtained from DHBs, it provides an insight into the cost and activities of consultants within the New Zealand health sector, the policies behind their engagement and the processes in place to ensure value for money. It finds that DHB spending on external consultants is substantial, at $NZ10-60 million annually. However, few DHBs had policies governing when consultants should be engaged and many were unable to easily identify the extent or purpose of consultancies within their organisation, making it difficult to derive an accurate picture of consultant activity throughout the DHB sector. Policies surrounding value for money were uncommon and, where present, were rarely applied. Given the large sums being spent by New Zealand's DHBs, and assuming expenditure is similar in other health systems, our findings point to the need for greater accountability for expenditure and better evidence of value for money of consultancies within publicly funded health systems., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Rising costs without perceived proportional improvements in quality and outcomes have motivated fundamental shifts in health care delivery and payment to achieve better value. Aligned with these efforts, several value assessment frameworks have been introduced recently to help providers, patients, and payers better understand the potential value of drugs and other interventions and make informed decisions about their use. Given their early stage of development, it is imperative to evaluate these efforts on an ongoing basis to identify how best to support and improve them moving forward. This article provides a multistakeholder perspective on the key limitations and opportunities posed by the current value assessment frameworks and areas of and actions for improvement. In particular, we outline 10 fundamental guiding principles and associated strategies that should be considered in subsequent iterations of the existing frameworks or by emerging initiatives in the future. Although value assessment frameworks may not be able to meet all the needs and preferences of stakeholders, we contend that there are common elements and potential next steps that can be supported to advance value assessment in the United States., (Copyright © 2017 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The adoption of primary (PP) versus secondary prophylaxis (SP) of febrile neutropenia (FN), with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF), for adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) regimens in breast cancer (BC) could be affected by its "value for money". This systematic review examined (i) cost-effectiveness of PP versus SP, (ii) FN threshold at which PP is cost-effective including the guidelines 20 % threshold and (iii) potential impact of G-CSF efficacy assumptions on outcomes. The systematic review identified all cost-effectiveness/cost-utility analyses (CEA/CUA) involving PP versus SP G-CSF for AC in BC that met predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Five relevant CEA/CUA were identified. These CEA/CUA examined different AC regimens (TAC = 2; FEC-D = 1; TC = 2) and G-CSF formulations (filgrastim "F" = 4; pegfilgrastim "P" = 4) with varying baseline FN-risk (range 22-32 %), mortality (range 1.4-6.0 %) and utility (range 0.33-0.47). The potential G-CSF benefit, including FN risk reduction with P versus F, varied among models. Overall, relative to SP, PP was not associated with good value for money, as per commonly utilized CE thresholds, at the baseline FN rates examined, including the consensus 20 % FN threshold, in most of these studies. The value for money associated with PP versus SP was primarily dependent on G-CSF benefit assumptions including reduced FN mortality and improved BC survival. PP G-CSF for FN prevention in BC patients undergoing AC may not be a cost-effective strategy at the guidelines 20 % FN threshold.

Background: An increase in the number of Indigenous homeless persons in Cairns, Northern Australia, prompted the Queensland Police Service (QPS) to commence a pilot 'Return to Country' (R2C) program. The program was designed to assist homeless people who were voluntarily seeking to return to their home communities. This study assesses the costs of running the program and evaluates its net economic impact., Methods: Retrospective uncontrolled cost, cost-effectiveness and cost-offset analyses were undertaken from a societal perspective. All costs were expressed in 2014 AU$., Results: The R2C program successfully assisted 140 participants to return home, reducing the prevalence of homelessness in the regional center by 9.6%. The total program cost was estimated as AU$ 135,831 or AU$ 970 per participant. The economic analysis indicated that R2C was value for money, potentially saving AU$ 2,714,460. Limitations of the study included retrospective data collection and no established alternative comparison group., Conclusion: R2C is a relatively simple, minimal cost program, which can be utilized by policy makers to offer one solution to homelessness. This economic evaluation informs the QPS of the effects of the R2C program in order to guide further program initiatives. The R2C model may be applied to assist temporarily stranded Indigenous people in other locations within Australia or internationally to return home. No funding was obtained for conducting this study., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Context: Public-private partnerships began under President Ricardo Lagos, driven by the need to provide roads and other hard facilities. Over time, they expanded into social concessions such as prisons and hospitals. During the Bachelet administration, the construction of two mid-sized hospitals of Santiago was tendered with private finance initiative. During the government of Sebastián Piñera, three more hospitals were tendered., Critical Analysis: This article critically examines the grounds on which social concessions have been introduced in different parts of the world. I argue that the there are two main rationales underlying the position of those favorable to concession arrangements: pragmatic reasons and ideological-utopian reasons. I refute the arguments related to closing the infrastructure gap, effect on public debt, transfer of risk to the private sector, greater efficiency of the private sector, freeing-up of public funds and quality of health care., Conclusions: Review of the international literature does not yield evidence in favor of hospital concessions consistent with the principles and drivers that promote them. Quite the contrary, when the “Value for Money” methodology has been used, concessions have proven to decrease the overall capacity of the health system and to negatively affect quality of health care. I also note that there is a potential impact on intergenerational equity with projects that span for long periods, as is the case of hospital concessions. I conclude that, since there is no evidence base grounded on sound technical principles in favor of this policy, the real underlying reasons to promote private financing of public health infrastructure are ideological, and functional to market interests but not to collective preferences.

Health policy has reacted to the financial crisis by overemphasising measures targeted at reducing unit costs, increasing barriers to access (waiting lists) or closing premises. It is too soon for scientific assessment of the impact of this reshaping of supply on equity, quality and safety, and on individual and population health. Nevertheless, the emergency measures taken to achieve fiscal stabilization have shifted the focus to resolving budget problems at the expenses of sounder and deeper initiatives aimed at deciding what must be funded and how. This article advocates a policy based on selective funding of services and benefits on the basis of their value. Other countries' experiences can serve as a useful guide, including robust methods to identify technologies (or their uses) of questionable value, prioritization criteria, and careful consideration of limitations associated with the elimination of a certain benefit, especially if it affects the founding values of the system. The necessary tools are available to the Spanish health system: the regulatory framework and technical bodies able to identify lower value care, support for decision-making, and timely evaluation of such decisions. Despite the numerous hurdles, maintaining the status quo is too expensive a choice, given the opportunity costs of effectiveness and safety losses, measured in terms of equity and the economic efficiency of the Spanish health system, which may ultimately translate into worsening of the population's health status., (Copyright © 2013 SESPAS. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.)

All governments face immense challenges in providing affordable healthcare for their citizens, and the diffusion of novel health technologies is a key driver of growth in expenditure for many. Although important methodological and process variations exist around the world, health economic evaluation is increasingly seen as an important tool to support decision-making around the introduction of new health technologies, interventions and programmes in countries of varying stages of economic development. In Australia, the assessment of the comparative cost-effectiveness of new medicines proposed for subsidy under the country's national drug subsidy programme, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, was introduced in the late 1980s and became mandatory in 1993, making Australia the first country to introduce such a requirement nationally. Since then the use of health economic evaluation has expanded and been applied to support decision-making across a broader range of health technologies, as well as to programmes in public health., (Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier GmbH.)

The aim of the study was to explore the expectations and experience of actually eating a healthy diet and using this experience to identify barriers to healthy eating and sustainable dietary change. Fifty participants (19-63 yrs) were provided with a healthy diet (i.e. complied with dietary recommendations) for three consecutive days. Afterwards a semi-structured interview was carried out to explore expectations, experience and barriers to healthy eating. Using a thematic analysis approach eight dominant themes emerged from the interviews. Four related to expectations and experience of healthy eating; realisation of what are appropriate portion sizes, an expectation to feel hungry, surprise that healthy diets comprised normal food, the desire for sweet snacks (e.g. chocolate). This demonstrated there are some misconception about healthy eating and distorted views of portion size. Four more themes emerged relating to barriers to healthy eating; competing priorities, social, peer and time pressure, importance of value for money, a lack of desire to cook. Poor knowledge of healthy eating or a lack of cooking skills were the least common barrier, suggesting that future interventions and policy to improve dietary intakes need to focus on social, cultural and economic issues rather than on lack of knowledge or skills., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To explore how key components of economic evaluations have been included in evaluations of health information systems (HIS), to determine the state of knowledge on value for money for HIS, and provide guidance for future evaluations., Materials and Methods: We searched databases, previously collected papers, and references for relevant papers published from January 2000 to June 2012. For selection, papers had to: be a primary study; involve a computerized system for health information processing, decision support, or management reporting; and include an economic evaluation. Data on study design and economic evaluation methods were extracted and analyzed., Results: Forty-two papers were selected and 33 were deemed high quality (scores ≥ 8/10) for further analysis. These included 12 economic analyses, five input cost analyses, and 16 cost-related outcome analyses. For HIS types, there were seven primary care electronic medical records, six computerized provider order entry systems, five medication management systems, five immunization information systems, four institutional information systems, three disease management systems, two clinical documentation systems, and one health information exchange network. In terms of value for money, 23 papers reported positive findings, eight were inconclusive, and two were negative., Conclusions: We found a wide range of economic evaluation papers that were based on different assumptions, methods, and metrics. There is some evidence of value for money in selected healthcare organizations and HIS types. However, caution is needed when generalizing these findings. Better reporting of economic evaluation studies is needed to compare findings and build on the existing evidence base we identified.

Due to the increasing availability and costs of biopharmaceuticals, policymakers are questioning whether they provide good value relative to other health interventions and many are increasingly relying on cost-utility analyses (CUAs) to supplement decision-making. Analyzing data from the Tufts Medical Center Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, this study critically reviewed the cost-utility literature for biopharmaceuticals and compared their value to other health interventions. Of 2,383 studies in the registry, biopharmaceutical CUAs comprised the sixth largest category of interventions at 11%. Characteristics of biopharmaceutical articles were similar to other CUAs; however, they displayed slightly better quality. The median cost-effectiveness ratio of biopharmaceuticals was less favorable (i.e., higher) than other interventions though many seem to provide value for money. A logistic regression showed that among biopharmaceuticals the cost-effectiveness of industry-sponsored studies and products that treat infectious diseases were significantly more likely to be favorable (less than the overall median), while cancer and neurological treatments were significantly less likely.