2015 APHA Annual Meeting & Expo

Home Events & Meetings Annual Meeting Schedule & Program

Recorded Annual Meeting Presentations (RAMP) are now available for purchase.
Only $90 for presenters, $140 for registered attendees and $200 for non-attendees.

Online Program

332072
Application of a post-hoc cost effectiveness analysis in a community-based intersectoral collaboration to reduce cardiovascular disease


Monday, November 2, 2015 : 1:00 p.m. - 1:15 p.m.

Heather Risser, PhD, Department of Pediatrics, UIC, Chicago, IL
Kristine Zimmermann, MPH, Center for Research on Women and Gender, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL
Leslie Carnahan, MPH, Center for Research on Women and Gender, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL
Background: Ideally, analysis of the cost-effectiveness of a health promotion intervention is integrated into a comprehensive evaluation plan prior to program implementation. However, programmatic needs and constraints may require a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) after a program has been implemented (post-hoc), requiring the use of available evaluation data.

Methods: We developed and implemented an eight-step process to analyze the cost-effectiveness of a community-based intervention to reduce cardiovascular disease risk in a rural region in Illinois: 1. Catalogue available data; 2. Determine additional data required; 3. Determine analytic options; 4. Understand equation components; 5. Determine equation variables; 6. Specify analytic assumptions; 7. Run analysis; and 8. Interpret results in the context of assumptions. 

Results: Using the post-hoc CEA model we determined annual program costs ($30,427.55), per person cost ($136.06), and incremental cost ($36.59). By combining these data with participants’ mean increase in moderate physical activity (approximately 1 additional day/week), we demonstrated a method for extrapolating return on investment, Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY), and stroke-risk reduction. We applied the method within the context of a cardiovascular risk reduction intervention to demonstrate the potential and limitations of this method.

Conclusion: We developed an eight-step process to implement a post-hoc CEA within an existing cardiovascular risk reduction intervention. Given that many health promotion programs operate with limited budgets and may lack access to health economists, this method is feasible for application to demonstrate economic benefits of other health promotion programs.

Learning Areas:

Conduct evaluation related to programs, research, and other areas of practice
Implementation of health education strategies, interventions and programs
Other professions or practice related to public health
Program planning
Public health or related research

Learning Objectives:
Identify the conditions under which a post hoc cost effectiveness analysis may be useful and feasible. Apply the steps in completing post hoc cost effectiveness analysis. Name the considerations involved in calculating the cost effectiveness of an ongoing prevention program. Describe the potential and limitations of the post hoc cost effectiveness method. Evaluate the cost effectiveness of a community-based, intersectoral collaboration to prevent cardiovascular disease in a high-risk population.

Keyword(s): Economic Analysis, Community-Based Health

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: The cost effectiveness analysis of a community-based program to reduce cardiovascular risk. I am the principal, co-principal, or primary evaluator on multiple federally funded grants evaluating community-based interventions.
Any relevant financial relationships? No

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.

Back to: 3281.0: Economic Impact and Return on Investment in Public Health