Waiting Well: Realist Economic Evaluation
Research type
Research Study
Full title
A realist economic evaluation of the Waiting Well prehabilitation programme in Tees Valley
IRAS ID
335718
Contact name
Sonia Dalkin
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Northumbria at Newcastle
Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier
https://osf.io/x7eg6, The wider study is OSF Registered
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 8 months, 30 days
Research summary
Different health or social services work in different ways for different people. Some kinds of research help establish what works best for who, while other types of research help to work out which services provide the best value for money. This information helps politicians and policymakers to make good decisions about what services to fund, and helps service providers (doctors, nurses, social workers etc.) to work out which services and treatments should be provided for whom. Providing the right services to the right people leads to better outcomes and makes better use of funding.
Evaluation is one type of research. Among the different types of evaluation, realist evaluation looks at ‘what works for whom, in which circumstances and how’, while economic evaluation examines costs and benefits to determine value for money. This research project aims to work out how to bring those two types of evaluation together, to help researchers understand what works, for whom, in what circumstances, at what cost and with what benefits. The combined approaches will be called 'Realist Economic Evaluation Methods' (REEM). The project will also develop guidance materials on how to use REEM in different research contexts.
Part of this study involves a pilot evaluation, which will use a REEM approach to evaluate the ‘Waiting Well’ prehabilitation programme in North and South Tees. Waiting Well helps patients prepare for elective surgery by supporting them to access a range of community-based services to benefit their health and wellbeing, in turn generating better outcomes and reducing inequalities. This evaluation will use a combination of interviews, focus groups and quantitative wellbeing data from patients, in addition to routinely collected data from Waiting Well and community organisations to: 1) help improve the delivery of Waiting Well; and 2) help the research team to test and refine the REEM guidance.
REC name
Yorkshire & The Humber - Leeds West Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
24/YH/0026
Date of REC Opinion
3 Apr 2024
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion