An Overview of Economic Evaluation of Infectious Diseases

The most industrialized countries in the world have of late been facing challenges in financial medical services caused by demographic and technical inventions changes. Budgets are allocated to finance health care costs that are unlimited sensitivity to infectious diseases. Through economic evaluation, the effort, etc decision-making king about the proper allocation of medical resources is influenced. Accordingly, the paper discusses the different forms of economic evaluation of infectious diseases.

An economic evaluation of infectious diseases is highly enacted to minimize possible risks of their spread.

Implementation of prevention programs saves been placed to reduce the massive cost of treatment to be attained in a periodizing, therefore, preclusion objectives are affected by discount rates used during the analysis. Cost-effectiveness is one of the crucial analyses used in assessing the effects caused by infectious diseases linked he economic trends. Bennett, Dolin, & Blaser (2014) affirm that cost evaluation analysis assesses the effectiveness of any technology used in the health care unit.

Moreover, they depict the performance and effect the drugs have on the human body thus preventing infections (Joumard, André, & Nicq, 2010).

Usage of technical efficiency highly minimizes the cost of operation in the provision of Medicare services. This is done through throthe ugh evaluation of incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER) and effective utilization of technology to maximize healthcare provision (Gray et al., 2010).

Consequently, technology will enable the ratio to give insanity get a lot of evil efficiencies as it is inclusive of medical equipment,t, drugs, and the design of intrusion plans. The ratio further measures the cost and savings differences to calculate the unit of life in a year.

Get quality help now

Bella Hamilton

Verified

Proficient in: Health Care

5 (234)

“ Very organized ,I enjoyed and Loved every bit of our professional interaction ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

The ovediseaseeases effectiveness comprs of both direct and indirect efficacy to safeguard the immunized individualsreduceucing the dangers imposed on the nonvaccinated. The use of the mathematmodelsmodel to integrate the prospective data analysis has intervened prevalent diseases before and after plan application (Kendal, & MacDonald 2010).

Prospective simulation aided by mathematical models involves the introduction and implementation ion effective different prevention policies time. The analyzed data validate the model by reducing the risks of infection among the individuals thus becoming beneficial to others by saving on the cost of medication.

The human capital approach is one of the approximate optimum probable losses in production due to infectious diseases. Through the friction cost method, the findings assume that the majority workforce paid in the previous year is unemployed during the intervention assessment (Quach et al., 201The the use of technology in the health centers has greatly impacted the minimization of the net costs associated with production thus evaluating to find the best alternatives (Bennett, Dolin, & Blaser, 201Consequentlyntly, technology advances prevent the intervention of treatment and diagnosshowst shoconsistencyence during the assessment period.

In conclusion, the essay depicts that cost-effectiveness analysis is the major economic assessment method for infectious diseases. Through economic evaluation, preventive measures are developed to reduce the transmission rates of such diseases thus better policies are implemented for treatment purposes. Different models have been used to terminate the transmission of pathogens and accurately formulate the general efficacy in healthcare provision which are vital in health economics.

References

1. Bennett, J. E., Dolin, R., & Blaser, M. J. (2014). Principles and practice of infectious diseases. Elsevier Health Sciences.
2. Feldstein, P. (2011). Health care economics. Cengage Learning.
3. Gray, A. M., Clarke, P. M., Wolstenholme, J. L., & Wordsworth, S. (2010).Applied methods of cost-effectiveness analysis in healthcare. OUP Oxford.
4. Henderson, J. (2011). Health Economics and Policy (with Economic Applications). Cengage Learning Joumard, I., André, C., & Nicq, C. (2010). Health care systems: efficiency and institutions.
5. Kendal, A. P., & MacDonald, N. E. (2010). Influenza pandemic planning and performance in Canada, 2009. Canadian Journal of Public Health/Revue Canadienne de Sante’e Publique, 447-453.
6. McPake, B., Normand, C., & Smith, S. (2013). Health economics: an international perspective. Routledge.
7. Quach, S., Hamid, J. S., Pereira, J. A., Heidebrecht, C. L., Deeks, S. L., Crowcroft, N. S., … & Kwong, J. C. (2012). Influenza vaccination coverage across ethnic groups in Canada. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 184 (15), 1673-1681.
8. Santerre, R., & Neun, S. (2012). Health economics: Theory, insights, and industry studies. Cengage Learning
9. Varabyova, Y., & Schreyögg, J. (2013). International comparisons of the technical efficiency of the hospital sector: panel data analysis of OECD countries using parametric and nononparametricpproaches. Health Policy, 112(1), 70-79. Bennett, Dolin, & Blaser (2014).