Life-extending technologies for terminally ill patients: views v policy choices Presentation 3 / Session Title: Extending life for people with a terminal.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Contingency Table Analysis Mary Whiteside, Ph.D..
Advertisements

Insights into the Canadian Education System A. Abigail Payne Department of Economics McMaster University.
Definitions Patient Experience Patient experience at NUH results from a range of activities that all impact upon patient care, access, safety and outcomes.
INTRODUCTION TO ETHICS IN PHARMACY PRACTICE PHCL 437
Investigating the prevalence and distribution of views across the UK population Helen Mason ECHE Dublin 14 th July 2014 Extending life for people with.
How do we achieve cost effective cancer treatments in the UK? Professor Peter Littlejohns Department of Public Health and Primary Care.
Voluntary Action Scotland Self Directed Support What does it mean The Theory and the Practice.
Grandparenting and health in Europe: a longitudinal analysis Di Gessa G, Glaser K and Tinker A Institute of Gerontology, Department of Social Science,
Highly Specialised Technologies Evaluations
ANALYZING MORE GENERAL SITUATIONS UNIT 3. Unit Overview  In the first unit we explored tests of significance, confidence intervals, generalization, and.
Identifying societal perspectives on the relative value of life extending end of life technologies presentation#1/ organised session: Extending life for.
Optimal Drug Development Programs and Efficient Licensing and Reimbursement Regimens Neil Hawkins Karl Claxton CENTRE FOR HEALTH ECONOMICS.
What role should probabilistic sensitivity analysis play in SMC decision making? Andrew Briggs, DPhil University of Oxford.
Chapter 11 Contingency Table Analysis. Nonparametric Systems Another method of examining the relationship between independent (X) and dependant (Y) variables.
ECON International Economics
Statistics II: An Overview of Statistics. Outline for Statistics II Lecture: SPSS Syntax – Some examples. Normal Distribution Curve. Sampling Distribution.
Gauging the Impact of Student Characteristics on Faculty Course Evaluations Laura Benson Marotta University at Albany – SUNY.
AGEC 608 Lecture 14, p. 1 AGEC 608: Lecture 14 Objective: Provide overview of contingent valuation method (CVM) and review strengths and weaknesses of.
Health care decision making Dr. Giampiero Favato presented at the University Program in Health Economics Ragusa, June 2008.
QM Spring 2002 Business Statistics Some Probability Essentials.
PSY 307 – Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences
Health Economics & Policy 3 rd Edition James W. Henderson Chapter 4 Economic Evaluation in Health Care.
BASIC STATISTICS WE MOST OFTEN USE Student Affairs Assessment Council Portland State University June 2012.
The problem of sampling error in psychological research We previously noted that sampling error is problematic in psychological research because differences.
Statistical Methods II
Alternatives to euthanasia: Palliative Care.  Pioneered by Dame Cicely Saunders Born in 1918 Dame Cicely trained as a nurse, a medical social worker.
Extending life for people with a terminal illness: a moral right or an expensive death? Empirical and methodological issues Rachel Baker, Helen Mason &
Cost-Effectiveness Problem l You have a $1.5 billion budget to spend on any combination of these programs:
Chapter 9 Statistical Data Analysis
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC A Practical Approach For Decision Makers SECOND EDITION EILEEN E. MORRISON.
The Modern State Chapter 3.
Modernising Nursing Careers NMC Pre-registration Nursing Review Lesley Barrowman Workshop 26 th July 2007.
Section 4-3 The Addition Rule. COMPOUND EVENT A compound event is any event combining two or more simple events. NOTATION P(A or B) = P(in a single trial,
Planning an Applied Research Project Chapter 7 – Forms of Quantitative Research © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved.
Cara Cahalan-Laitusis Operational Data or Experimental Design? A Variety of Approaches to Examining the Validity of Test Accommodations.
Case Studies Harry Anthony Patrinos World Bank November 2009.
STATISTICS AND PROBABILITY CHAPTER 4. STAT. & PROBABILITY 4.1 Sampling, Line, Bar and Circle Graphs 4.2 The Mean, Median and Mode 4.3 Counting Problems.
Economic evaluation of drugs for rare diseases CENTRE FOR HEALTH ECONOMICS K Claxton, C McCabe, A Tsuchiya Centre for Health Economics and Department of.
Special Topics. General Addition Rule Last time, we learned the Addition Rule for Mutually Exclusive events (Disjoint Events). This was: P(A or B) = P(A)
PRSPs & Parliament in Africa Parliamentary Performance in Four PRSP Countries Dr. Rasheed Draman Parliamentary Centre.
MRCGP Video assessment of consulting skills 2004.
Educational Research Chapter 13 Inferential Statistics Gay, Mills, and Airasian 10 th Edition.
12/10/15.  It is a Cross Life Cycle Activity (CLCA) that may be performed at any stage ◦ In fact, some part of it (e.g. risk analysis and management)
1 The Economics of Health Care and New Technologies Friday October 18, 2002 Between Technology and Humanity, Brussels Jan Busschbach PhD, –Department of.
YMS Chapter 6 Probability: Foundations for Inference 6.1 – The Idea of Probability.
Around the World in 80 Tosses Introducing Hypothesis Tests By Tossing a Beach Ball Lisa Brock, West Forsyth High School Carol.
Health and Disease in Populations 2002 Sources of variation (1) Paul Burton! Jane Hutton.
THE GUIDE TO ECONOMIC THINKING
3.5.4 T HE IMPACT OF GOVERNMENT AND THE EU T HE GOVERNMENT AND THE EU How many of the member states can you name?
N318b Winter 2002 Nursing Statistics Specific statistical tests: The T-test for means Lecture 8.
Who is involved in making NICE guidance recommendations and what evidence do they look at? Jane Cowl, Senior Public Involvement Adviser Tommy Wilkinson,
LONG TERM CARE EXTENDED CARE The Market for LTC Ages 40 to 75.
BUS 308 Entire Course (Ash Course) For more course tutorials visit BUS 308 Week 1 Assignment Problems 1.2, 1.17, 3.3 & 3.22 BUS 308.
BUS 308 Entire Course (Ash Course) FOR MORE CLASSES VISIT BUS 308 Week 1 Assignment Problems 1.2, 1.17, 3.3 & 3.22 BUS 308 Week 1.
EARLY IDENTIFICATION OF MENTAL ILLNESS IN COUNTY JAILS/DENTENTION CENTERS.
Logistic Regression: Regression with a Binary Dependent Variable.
Work experience as a gateway to talent in the UK: Assessing business views Dr Joan Wilson 21 July 2016 London Conference on Employer Engagement in Education.
DIAFORA: a new Diabetic Foot Risk Assessment Tool
Human Resources - Performance
Adding Probabilities 12-5
Hypothesis Testing.
Palliative Approach to Care
Unit 3 Hypothesis.
Monday, 17 September 2018 Should capacity assessment be performed routinely prior to discussing advance care planning with older people? Oleg Kiriaev,
Dr. Muhammad Ajmal Zahid Chairman, Department of Psychiatry,
Health care decision making
Overview of Capital Budgeting
Statistics II: An Overview of Statistics
Solving Unknown Primary cancER (SUPER)
Presentation transcript:

Life-extending technologies for terminally ill patients: views v policy choices Presentation 3 / Session Title: Extending life for people with a terminal illness: a moral right or an expensive death? ECHE Dublin 14 th – 16 th July Neil McHugh Yunus Centre for Social Business and Health Glasgow Caledonian University

Overview Views versus policy choices Rationale Factor Membership results Policy Choice 1: ‘Decision Rule’ Design Results Convergence hypotheses & results Policy Choice 2: ‘Treatment Choice’ Design Results Convergence hypotheses & results Summing up... Further analysis

Views versus policy choices – why? Relative value of life extending treatments for people with a terminal illness Understanding views that exist in society Examine distribution of views in society Why introduce policy choices? What happens to an individual’s views? Specific questions of resource allocation Designed to reflect the views identified Form of predictive validity – empirical question

Policy Choice Version: Factor Membership Sample 1429 respondents quota sampled across UK All: both policy choices, Approach 1, socio-demographics One further approach from Approaches 2-5 selected at random Factor membership (FM) calculated for policy choice version FM: intensity score > median Focus on: F1, F3, F1/3 => F1&3s (629 respondents) and F2s (443 respondents) Factor Membership% 1534% % 3957% 1/21229% 1/348134% 2/3896% 1/2/3977% null493% Total %

Policy Choice 1: ‘Decision Rule’ High level rules to govern decisions of provision How should a health system assess drugs for terminally ill patients that do not pass a value for money test? Opportunity cost and value for money test (VFMT) 3 mutually exclusive policies: Policy A: standard VFMT (applied to all new treatments) Policy B: all new treatments for terminal illnesses should be given special consideration (apply a different VFMT) role of cost value of different types of health benefits Policy C: some new treatments for terminal illnesses should be given special consideration (apply a different VFMT) treatment benefits / type of patient role of cost

‘ Decision Rule’ – Results Policy A (standard VFMT) Policy B (all given special consideration) Policy C (it depends.. some special consideration)Total Choice between A - C 50335%27819%64845%1429 LE more important than QoL 73% Extend Life 6610% QoL more important than LE 10738% Improve QoL 46872% LE and QoL equally important 10237% Depending on % L more important but QoL must be good 6222% Regardless of cost %23937% Limit %40963%

Convergence hypotheses: views v ‘decision rule’ Hypothesis: views would predict decision rule Predictions: strong (S) weak (W) Hypotheses: views v ‘decision rule’ ViewsPolicy A (standard VFMT) Policy B (all special consideration) Policy C (it depends.. some special consideration) F1&3s (health max. / QoL) S – YesS – NoS – Yes F2 (patient)S – NoS – YesW – Yes

Convergence Results: views v ‘decision rule’ F2 v Decision rule %Hypotheses Prediction accuracy F2 = PA5913.3%S - No F2 = PB %S - Yes - F2 = PC %W - Yes - Total443100% F1&3s v Decision rule %Hypotheses Prediction accuracy F1&3s = PA %S - Yes F1&3s = PB538.4%S - No F1&3s = PC %S - Yes Total629100%

Policy Choice 2:'Treatment Choice’ Lower level decisions between competing treatments Choice between 3 mutually exclusive new treatments a fixed, additional health budget Rank treatments and select a reason for preferred choice Two person trade-off (PTO) questions: most preferred treatment v second-best treatment most preferred treatment v least preferred treatment

‘Treatment Choice’: Treatment A Patients are currently suffering from a non-life threatening illness that causes them discomfort and fatigue. The illness also reduces their mobility and ability to undertake their usual activities. This occurs a few times throughout every year for the rest of their life. Each episode lasts for up to 2 weeks. A new treatment is available that will reduce their symptoms and make patients feel better, improving their quality of life for the rest of their life. Funding will mean that 100 patients can be treated in the next year.

‘Treatment Choice’: Treatment B Patients are currently suffering from a terminal illness that causes them discomfort and fatigue. The illness also reduces their mobility and ability to undertake their usual activities. A new treatment is available for terminally ill patients in the last year of their life. The treatment will extend patients’ lives by three months. It will not improve their quality of life. Funding will mean that 100 patients can be treated in the next year.

‘Treatment Choice’: Treatment C Patients are currently suffering from a terminal illness that causes them discomfort and fatigue. The illness also reduces their mobility and ability to undertake their usual activities. A new treatment is available for terminally ill patients in the last year of their life. The treatment will reduce their symptoms and make patients feel better, improving their quality of life. It will not extend their life. Funding will mean that 100 patients can be treated in the next year.

‘Treatment Choice’ – Results Treatment A and C are the most popular choices Treatment B is the least preferred option Rankings Treatment A (Count/%)Treatment B (Count/%)Treatment C (Count/%) / 51%86 / 6%611 / 43% / 35%240 / 17%689 / 48% / 14%1103 / 77%129 / 9% Total 1429

Convergence hypotheses: views v ‘treatment choice’ Hypothesis: views would predict treatment (T) choice Predictions: strong (S) weak (W) Hypotheses: views v ‘treatment choice’ ViewsTA (non-life threatening illness) TB (terminal illness – life extension) TC (terminal illness – quality of life) F1&3s (health max. / QoL) S – YesS – NoW – Yes F2 (patient)W – Yes

Convergence results: views v ‘treatment choice’ F1&3s v ‘Treatment Choice’ %Hypotheses Prediction accuracy F1&3s = TA 43469%S – Yes F1&3s = TB 152.4%S – No F1&3s = TC %W – Yes Total629100% F2 v ‘Treatment Choice’ %Hypotheses Prediction accuracy F2 = TA %W – Yes F2 = TB4710.6%W – Yes F2 = TC %W – Yes Total443100%

Summing up..... Further Analysis Results seem intuitively correct Further analysis: Explore PTOs Convergence between ‘decision rule’ and ‘treatment choice’ Link with socio-demographic information Regression analysis on links between views and policy choice questions