Cost Effectiveness of Mid-level Providers

The purpose of this study was to examine the cost effectiveness of an intermediate health care provider (such as a doctor assistant) compared to a doctor. In order to thoroughly evaluate cost differences, one or more aspects of a doctor assistant and a classic physician must be considered. From a purely economic point of view it is necessary to deal with the cost of education depending on the type of medicine being practiced and the cost of hiring between the doctor's assistant and a traditional doctor.

Dedicated institutions that support these two groups are often called "intermediate providers" or "doctor expanders" and have different opinions. The American National Nurses Association (AANP) points only to the total number of NPs or NP, in contrast to the use of terms such as "intermediate health care providers" and "doctor expanders". The position of the association is as follows. "NP is qualified as an independent practitioner.AANP encourages employers, policy makers, medical professionals, etc. to quote NPs through headlines, as an example, an independent Certified health care providers, primary care providers, health professionals, and clinicians.

The purpose of this study was to examine the cost effectiveness of an intermediate health care provider (such as a doctor assistant) compared to a doctor. In order to thoroughly evaluate cost differences, one or more aspects of a doctor assistant and a classic physician must be considered. From a purely economic point of view it is necessary to deal with the cost of education depending on the type of medicine being practiced and the cost of hiring between the doctor's assistant and a traditional doctor.

Most economic investigations in this area take the form of a cost-benefit analysis comparing the cost of intervention and clinical outcome. The increasing cost and effectiveness of the intervention provides the decision maker with information about who can allocate the most effectively less resources during different medical interventions compared to the next best option be able to. It is necessary to consider various factors such as decision makers, impartiality, influence on budget, political preference and so on. However, even considering efficiency alone, it may be unreliable to rank treatments based on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Because the dimension of cost-effectiveness analysis is sensitive to change, it is difficult to compare ratios between models. Another problem is that most economic evaluations are not based on actual on-site post-marketing work, but based on performance surveys conducted before marketing.