Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:02:13.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Implications of learning effects for hospital costs of new health technologies: The case of intensity modulated radiation therapy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2007

Julia Bonastre ,
Eric Noël ,
Julie Chevalier ,
Jean Pierre Gerard ,
Dimitri Lefkopoulos ,
Jean Bourhis ,
Rene Jean Bensadoun  and
Gerard de Pouvourville
Julia Bonastre
Affiliation:
Gustave Roussy Institute
Eric Noël
Affiliation:
Gustave Roussy Institute
Julie Chevalier
Affiliation:
Gustave Roussy Institute
Jean Pierre Gerard
Affiliation:
Antoine Lacassagne Centre
Dimitri Lefkopoulos
Affiliation:
Gustave Roussy Institute
Jean Bourhis
Affiliation:
Gustave Roussy Institute
Rene Jean Bensadoun
Affiliation:
Antoine Lacassagne Centre
Gerard de Pouvourville
Affiliation:
ESSEC Business School
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: The impact of learning effects on the variability of costs of new health technologies in a prospective payment system (PPS) through the case of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) was studied.

Methods: A series of consecutive patients treated in nine medical centers was enrolled in a prospective study. Direct costs were assessed from the perspective of the healthcare providers. We used a two-level model to explain the variability of costs: patients nested within centers. Learning effects at the center level were considered through a fixed effect (the learning curve slope) and a random effect (the initial cost level). Covariates were introduced to explain the patterns of variation in terms of patient characteristics.

Results: The mean direct cost of IMRT was €5,962 (range, €2,414–€24,733). Manpower accounted for 53 percent of this cost. Learning effects explained 42 percent of the variance between centers (which was 88 percent of the total variance) and were associated with a substantial decrease in treatment costs. The mean initial treatment direct cost was €6,332 in centers with a previous experience of IMRT, whereas it was €14,192 in centers implementing IMRT for the first time. Including logistics costs and overhead, the full cost of IMRT was €10,916. Average reimbursement was €6,987.

Conclusions: Learning effects are a strong confounding factor in the analysis of costs of innovative health technologies involving learning effects. In a PPS, innovative health technology involving learning effects necessitates specific reimbursement mechanisms.

Keywords

Learning curveMultilevel modelingIMRTProspective payment system
Type
GENERAL ESSAYS
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , April 2007 , pp. 248 - 254
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Bolsi, A, Fogliata, A, Cozzi, L. Radiotherapy of small intracranial tumours with different advanced techniques using photon and proton beams: A treatment planning study. Radiother Oncol. 2003; 68: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Cook, JA, Ramsay, CR, Fayers, P. Statistical evaluation of learning curve effects in surgical trials. Clin Trials. 2004; 1: 421–427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Eisbruch, A. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy in the treatment of head and neck Cancer. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2005; 2: 34–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Galvin, J, Ezzell, G, Eisbrauch, A et al. , Implementing IMRT in clinical practice: A joint document of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology and the American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Int J Radiat 0ncol Biol Phys. 2004; 58: 1616–1634.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Khoo, VS. Radiotherapeutic techniques for prostate cancer, dose escalation and brachytherapy. Clin Oncol. 2005; 17: 560–571.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Miles, E, Clark, C, Urbano, M et al. , The impact of introducing intensity modulated radiotherapy into routine clinical practice. Radiother Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2005; 77: 241–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Ramsay, CR, Grant, AM, Wallace, SA et al. , Statistical assessment of the learning curves of health technologies. Health Technol Assess. 2001; 5: 1–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Singer, JD, Willett, JB. Applied longitudinal data analysis. Modeling change and event occurrence. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Singer, JD. Using SAS PROC MIXED to Fit Multilevel Model, Hierarchical Models and Individual Growth Models. JEBS. 1998; 24: 323–355.Google Scholar
10.Webb, S. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT): A clinical reality for cancer treatment, any fool can understand this. The 2004 Silvanus Thompson Memorial Lecture. Br J Radiol. 2005; 78: S64–S72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed