IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v21y2020i5d10.1007_s10198-020-01168-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Amsterdam Wrist Rules: how much money can they save?

Author

Listed:
  • Marjolein A. M. Mulders

    (University of Amsterdam)

  • Monique M. J. Walenkamp

    (University of Amsterdam)

  • Nico L. Sosef

    (Spaarne Gasthuis)

  • Frank Ouwehand

    (University of Amsterdam)

  • Romuald van Velde

    (Tergooi Hospitals)

  • J. Carel Goslings

    (Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis)

  • Niels W. L. Schep

    (Maasstad Hospital)

Abstract

Purpose To allow physicians to be more selective in their request for a radiograph of the wrist and to potentially reduce costs, the Amsterdam Wrist Rules (AWR) have been developed, externally validated, and recently also implemented. The aim of this study was to conduct an incremental cost analysis and budget impact analysis of the implementation of the AWR at the emergency department (ED) in the Netherlands. Methods A cost-minimisation analysis to determine the expected cost savings for implementation of the Amsterdam Wrist Rules. The incremental difference in costs before and after implementation of the AWR was based on the reduction in costs for radiographs, the cost savings due to reduction of ED consultation times and the costs of a re-evaluation appointment by a physician. Results In the Netherlands, implementation of the AWR could potentially result in 6% cost savings per patient with a wrist injury. In addition, implementation of the AWR resulted in €203,510 cost savings annually nationwide. In the sensitivity analysis, an increase in physician compliance to 100% substantially increased the potential total amount of annual cost savings to €610,248, which is 6% of total costs before implementation. Variation in time spent at the ED, a decrease and increase in costs and patients presenting annually at the ED did not change the cost savings substantially. Conclusion Implementation of the AWR has been shown to reduce direct and indirect costs and can, therefore, result in considerable savings of healthcare consumption and expenditure.

Suggested Citation

  • Marjolein A. M. Mulders & Monique M. J. Walenkamp & Nico L. Sosef & Frank Ouwehand & Romuald van Velde & J. Carel Goslings & Niels W. L. Schep, 2020. "The Amsterdam Wrist Rules: how much money can they save?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(5), pages 745-750, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:21:y:2020:i:5:d:10.1007_s10198-020-01168-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-020-01168-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-020-01168-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-020-01168-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles E. Phelps & Alvin I. Mushlin, 1988. "Focusing Technology Assessment Using Medical Decision Theory," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 8(4), pages 279-289, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hui Zhang & Christian Wernz & Danny R. Hughes, 2018. "Modeling and designing health care payment innovations for medical imaging," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 37-51, March.
    2. Charles F. Manski, 2020. "Towards Reasonable Patient Care Under Uncertainty," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 38(2), pages 227-245, April.
    3. Charles E. Phelps, 1997. "Good Technologies Gone Bad," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 17(1), pages 107-117, February.
    4. Charles F. Manski, 2018. "Reasonable patient care under uncertainty," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(10), pages 1397-1421, October.
    5. Charles F. Manski, 2022. "Patient‐centered appraisal of race‐free clinical risk assessment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(10), pages 2109-2114, October.
    6. Charles F. Manski, 2016. "Credible Ecological Inference for Personalized Medicine: Formalizing Clinical Judgment," NBER Working Papers 22643, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Kämpfen, F.; & Gómez-Olivé, X.; & O’Donnell, O.; & Riumallo Herl, C.;, 2023. "Effectiveness of Population-Based Hypertension Screening: A Multidimensional Regression Discontinuity Design," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 23/15, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    8. Charles F. Manski, 2023. "Using Limited Trial Evidence to Credibly Choose Treatment Dosage when Efficacy and Adverse Effects Weakly Increase with Dose," NBER Working Papers 31305, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. De Donder, Philippe & Bardey, David & Zaporozhets, Vera, 2024. "The Health Technology Assessment Approach of the Economic Value of Diagnostic Tests - A Literature Review," TSE Working Papers 24-1508, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    10. Joanne Lord & George Laking & Alastair Fischer, 2006. "Non‐linearity in the cost‐effectiveness frontier," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(6), pages 565-577, June.
    11. Katherine Payne, 2009. "Fish and chips all round? Regulation of DNA‐based genetic diagnostics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(11), pages 1233-1236, November.
    12. Mark Sculpher & Karl Claxton, 2012. "Real Economics Needs to Reflect Real Decisions," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-136, February.
    13. Meltzer, David, 2001. "Addressing uncertainty in medical cost-effectiveness analysis: Implications of expected utility maximization for methods to perform sensitivity analysis and the use of cost-effectiveness analysis to s," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 109-129, January.
    14. Bardey, David & De Donder , Philippe & Zaporozhets , Vera, 2024. "The Health Technology Assessment Approach of The Economic Value of Diagnostic Test: A Literature Review," Documentos CEDE 21041, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    15. K. Drakopoulos & R. S. Randhawa, 2021. "Why Perfect Tests May Not Be Worth Waiting For: Information as a Commodity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6678-6693, November.
    16. George Laking & Joanne Lord & Alastair Fischer, 2006. "The economics of diagnosis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(10), pages 1109-1120, October.
    17. Claxton, Karl, 1999. "The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 341-364, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Distal radius; Fracture; Trauma; Decision rule; Radiograph; Cost analysis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:21:y:2020:i:5:d:10.1007_s10198-020-01168-x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.