Putting health metrics into practice: using the disability-adjusted life year for strategic decision making.

backgroundImplementing organizations are pressured to be accountable for performance. Many health impact metrics present limitations for priority setting; they do not permit comparisons across different interventions or health areas. In response, Population Services International (PSI) adopted the disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted as its bottom-line performance metric. While international standards exist for calculating DALYs to determine burden of disease (BOD), PSI's use of DALYs averted is novel. It uses DALYs averted to assess and compare the health impact of its country programs, and to understand the effectiveness of a portfolio of interventions. This paper describes how the adoption of DALYs averted influenced organizational strategy and presents the advantages and constraints of using the metric.

methodsHealth impact data from 2001-2011 were analyzed by program area and geographic region to measure PSI's performance against its goal of doubling health impact between 2007-2011. Analyzing 10 years of data permitted comparison with previous years' performance. A case study of PSI's Asia and Eastern European (A/EE) region, and PSI/Laos, is presented to illustrate how the adoption of DALYs averted affected strategic decision making.

resultsBetween 2007-2011, PSI's programs doubled the total number of DALYs averted from 2002-2006. Most DALYs averted were within malaria, followed by HIV/AIDS and family planning (FP). The performance of PSI's A/EE region relative to other regions declined with the switch to DALYs averted. As a result, the region made a strategic shift to align its work with countries' BOD. In PSI/Laos, this redirection led to better-targeted programs and an approximate 50% gain in DALYs averted from 2009-2011.

conclusionsPSI's adoption of DALYs averted shifted the organization's strategic direction away from product sales and toward BOD. Now, many strategic decisions are based on "BOD-relevance," the share of the BOD that interventions can potentially address. This switch resulted in more targeted strategies and greater program diversification. Challenges remain in convincing donors to support interventions in disease areas that are relevant to a country's BOD, and in developing modeling methodologies. The global health community will benefit from the use of standard health impact metrics to improve strategic decision making and more effectively respond to the changing global burden of disease.