COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF COMMUNITY BASED REHABILITATION PROGRAM USING WILLINGNESS TO PAY MEASURED BY THE CONTINGENT VALUATION METHOD

DOI Web Site 4 Citations 52 References

Bibliographic Information

Other Title
  • 機能訓練教室の費用便益分析　仮想評価法によって測定された支払意思額を用いて
  • キノウ クンレン キョウシツ ノ ヒヨウ ベンエキ ブンセキ カソウ ヒョウカホウ ニ ヨッテ ソクテイ サレタ シハライ イシガク オ モチイテ

Search this article

Description

Objective There have been few studies on economic evaluation of publicly provided community health services in Japan. The purpose of the present investigation was to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of a community based rehabilitation program provided by municipalities, using the willingness to pay (WTP) measured by the contingent valuation method, a survey-based approach to measure the monetary valuation for the benefit.<br/>Methods The study was held in 18 wards of Yokohama city. The cost per capita of the program in each ward was calculated using the data from a statement of accounts and a report of activities of public health nurses, other officials, and volunteers, in the 1999 fiscal year. The WTP for the program was measured by a survey of 631 people who participated in the programs held in October and November, 2000. The mean, median, and 95% CI of WTP were calculated as measures of the benefit.<br/>Results The response rate of the survey was 73.4%. The mean and median WTP were ¥441 and ¥300 respectively, and the 95% CI ranged from-¥800 to ¥1,682. The WTP was negatively related to the duration of functional disability, and positively related to income. However, the WTP was not significantly related to self-perceived effectiveness of the program and the SF-36. The costs per capita without the cost of volunteers among 18 wards ranged from ¥2,079 to ¥6,732, and those with the cost of volunteers ranged from ¥3,289 to ¥8,366. The net benefit per capita was negative.<br/>Conclusions To conduct cost-benefit analyses of community based rehabilitation programs more precisely, it is necessary to measure the costs of medical care and long term care saved and the benefits to others (e.g. volunteers, community residents, etc.) and to assess the WTP so that various aspects of effectiveness (health and non-health benefits) are taken into account.

Journal

Citations (4)*help

See more

References(52)*help

See more

Keywords

Details 詳細情報について

Report a problem

Back to top