Attilio V. Granata, MD, MBA; Alan L. Hillman, MD, MBA
In this paper, cost and effectiveness data for six clinical interventions are applied simultaneously to a hypothetical population of 100 000 patients to show how selecting guidelines to maximize overall population benefit compares with selecting the best guidelines for individual patients.By entering effectiveness (added survival) and cost information from recent prevention, screening, diagnostic, and therapeutic guidelines into a computer-based optimization model, the options that maximized overall population effectiveness while keeping additional cost within varying specified constraints were identified.
In 57% of selection opportunities, the clusters of guidelines that yielded maximum population benefit differed from those that maximized benefit for individual patients.Some choices were more stable than others over ranges of cost constraints.
Clinical practice guidelines chosen to maximize cost-effectiveness for individual patients often do not maximize cost-effectiveness for populations of patients. To allocate resources as efficiently as possible, decision makers should consider other sources of information in addition to the recommendations of specific practice guidelines. “Robust” guidelines that simultaneously address both individual and societal health benefit should be sought.
Learn more about subscription options.
Register Now for a free account.
Granata AV, Hillman AL. Competing Practice Guidelines: Using Cost-Effectiveness Analysis To Make Optimal Decisions. Ann Intern Med. 1998;128:56–63. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-128-1-199801010-00009
Download citation file:
Published: Ann Intern Med. 1998;128(1):56-63.
Healthcare Delivery and Policy.
Results provided by:
Copyright © 2017 American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.
Print ISSN: 0003-4819 | Online ISSN: 1539-3704
Conditions of Use
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only