Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26013765›Full record

Observational studyImplementation science : IS2015

A detailed report of the resource use and costs associated with implementation of a short stay programme for breast cancer surgery.

Stephanie M C Ament, Mascha de Kok, Cornelis J H van de Velde, Jan A Roukema, Toine V R J Bell, Fred W van der Ent, Trudy van der Weijden, Maarten F von Meyenfeldt, Carmen D Dirksen

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Implementation science : IS, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Implementation science: from evidence to practice.Acta medica colombiana : AMC : organo de la Asociacion Columbiana de Medicina Interna
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Stephanie M C AmentDepartment of Family Medicine, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. box 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. stephanie.ament@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
Mascha de KokGeneral Practice centre "Het Anker", Seringenstraat 259, 3142, NV, Maassluis, The Netherlands. maschadekok@hotmail.com.
Cornelis J H van de VeldeDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, P.O. box 9600, 2033, RC, Leiden, The Netherlands. C.J.H.van_de_Velde@lumc.nl.
Jan A RoukemaDepartment of Surgery, St. Elisabeth Hospital, P.O. box 90151, 5000, LC, Tilburg, The Netherlands. a.roukema@elisabeth.nl.
Toine V R J BellDepartment of Surgery, Laurentius Hospital, P.O. box 920, 6040, AX, Roermond, The Netherlands. a.bell@lzr.nl.
Fred W van der EntDepartment of Surgery, Orbis Medical Centre, P.O. box 5500, 6130, MB, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands. Fredvanderent@gmail.com.
Trudy van der WeijdenDepartment of Family Medicine, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. box 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. trudy.vanderweijden@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
Maarten F von MeyenfeldtDepartment of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. box 5800, 6202, AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands. mf.vonmeyenfeldt@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
Carmen D DirksenDepartment of Family Medicine, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. box 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. c.dirksen@mumc.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the increased attention for assessing the effectiveness of implementation strategies, most implementation studies provide little or no information on its associated costs. The focus of the current study was to provide a detailed report of the resource use and costs associated with implementation of a short stay programme for breast cancer surgery in four Dutch hospitals.

methodsThe analysis was performed alongside a multi-centre implementation study. The process of identification, measurement and valuation of the implementation activities was based on recommendations for the design, analysis and reporting of health technology assessments. A scoring form was developed to prospectively determine the implementation activities at professional and implementation expert level. A time horizon of 5 years was used to calculate the implementation costs per patient.

resultsIdentified activities were consisted of development and execution of the implementation strategy during the implementation project. Total implementation costs over the four hospitals were €83.293. Mean implementation costs, calculated for 660 patients treated over a period of 5 years, were €25 per patient. Subgroup analyses showed that the implementation costs ranged from €3.942 to €32.000 on hospital level. From a local hospital perspective, overall implementation costs were €21 per patient, after exclusion of the costs made by the expert centre.

conclusionsWe provided a detailed case description of how implementation costs can be determined. Notable differences in implementation costs between hospitals were observed.

trial registrationISRCTN: ISRCTN77253391.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHospital AdministrationHumansLength of StayNetherlandsResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID26013765
PMCPMC4449601

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.