Donovan Thomasina, Abell Bridget, McPhail Steven M, Carter Hannah E
Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Digital Health and Informatics, Metro South Health, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Implement Sci. 2025 Mar 7;20(1):13. doi: 10.1186/s13012-025-01423-w.
It is important to determine the relative value of health innovations when allocating limited healthcare resources. Implementation strategies require and consume healthcare resources yet are often excluded from published economic evaluations. This paper reports on the development of a pragmatic implementation costing instrument to assist with the planning, delivery, and evaluation of digital health implementation strategies.
A modified e-Delphi process was adopted to develop an implementation costing instrument. Purposive sampling was used to recruit a panel of experts in implementation science, health economic evaluations and/or digital health from the academic, government, clinical or health service sectors. In each round, participants were sent an electronic questionnaire and a prototype of the implementation costing instrument. The prototype in the initial round was informed from a literature review and qualitative interview findings. The prototype was updated iteratively between rounds in response to the panel's feedback. In subsequent rounds, participants also received the anonymous results of items that did not reach consensus in the previous round. Termination occurred once consensus was reached on integral questions (those pertaining specifically to the instrument design) or when three rounds were completed, to prevent sample fatigue. Consensus was defined as at least 75% of experts in agreement for any item.
Consensus was reached on the core components and design of the instrument from a panel of twelve experts in implementation science, health economic evaluations and/or digital health. Areas where consensus was not reached included users' level of implementation science knowledge, specificity of the tool to digital health and accessibility via digital formats.
Cost-IS is a pragmatic data collection instrument designed to estimate the costs of implementation strategies for digital health solutions. Further piloting of Cost-IS is required to establish its feasibility and generalisability.
在分配有限的医疗资源时,确定健康创新的相对价值非常重要。实施策略需要并消耗医疗资源,但在已发表的经济评估中往往被排除在外。本文报告了一种实用的实施成本核算工具的开发情况,以协助数字健康实施策略的规划、实施和评估。
采用改良的电子德尔菲法来开发实施成本核算工具。采用目的抽样法从学术、政府、临床或卫生服务部门招募了一组实施科学、卫生经济评估和/或数字健康方面的专家。在每一轮中,向参与者发送一份电子问卷和实施成本核算工具的原型。初始轮次的原型是根据文献综述和定性访谈结果制定的。根据专家小组的反馈,在各轮之间对原型进行迭代更新。在后续轮次中,参与者还会收到上一轮未达成共识的项目的匿名结果。一旦在整体问题(即与工具设计具体相关的问题)上达成共识,或者完成三轮后,即终止调查,以防止样本疲劳。共识定义为任何项目至少75%的专家达成一致。
由十二名实施科学、卫生经济评估和/或数字健康方面的专家组成的小组就该工具的核心组成部分和设计达成了共识。未达成共识的领域包括用户的实施科学知识水平、该工具对数字健康的针对性以及通过数字格式的可访问性。
Cost-IS是一种实用的数据收集工具,旨在估算数字健康解决方案实施策略的成本。需要对Cost-IS进行进一步试点,以确定其可行性和普遍性。