Sensitivity analysis Use this section of the economic case to subject the preferred option to a sensitivity analysis. In other words, if one or more key financial risks was to materialise, how would this change the economic appraisal of the options. Would it still be the preferred option? By how much would the underlying assumptions need to vary to produce a different ranking of the options? Conclusion - the preferred option Summarise here the preferred interoperability option based the economic case and the rationale for choosing it. This will include an overall assessment of the option against the key service requirements, the spending objectives for the programme and the critical success factors highlighted, along with an analysis of the economic costs, benefits and net present value of the scheme, together with an assessment of the qualitative (non-financial) benefits, risks and sensitivity of the preferred solution. 1 Interoperability dimensions – There are a multitude of potential options available to each interoperability programme based the specific context. To consider these fully, it is important that there is a structured process for considering the long list of potential options and the different dimensions of possible options. Local health communities developing the business case for interoperability are encouraged to combine the knowledge, experience and views of a wide range of stakeholders including but not limited to clinicians, managers, technical – – specialists, patients and commissioners. The following checklist may help when brainstorming potential options for the local interoperability programme: Scope of stakeholder involvement. This will be a function of geography and stakeholder support. While the benefits of interoperability will increase as more stakeholders are involved (because the patient/citizen history will be more complete), the risks of localism, protracted decision making and the costs of delivery also increase Scope of data flows. The more data sources that are included in the interoperability programme, the more complete the patient/citizen history will be and the benefits of clinical and administrative workflow will increase but the costs and risks of information exchange and system interfaces will also increase Incremental or new build strategy. A new interoperability programme could be developed to incrementally build on a mature interoperability site in a neighbouring geography or a decision could be made to start a ‘greenfield’ interoperability site
Sensitivity analysis Use this section of the economic case to subject the preferred option to a sensitivity analysis. In other words, if one or more key financial risks was to materialise, how would this change the economic appraisal of the options. Would it still be the preferred option? By how much would the underlying assumptions need to vary to produce a different ranking of the options? Conclusion - the preferred option Summarise here the preferred interoperability option based the economic case and the rationale for choosing it. This will include an overall assessment of the option against the key service requirements, the spending objectives for the programme and the critical success factors highlighted, along with an analysis of the economic costs, benefits and net present value of the scheme, together with an assessment of the qualitative (non-financial) benefits, risks and sensitivity of the preferred solution. 1 – Interoperability dimensions There are a multitude of potential options available to each interoperability programme based the specific context. To consider these fully, it is important that there is a structured process for considering the long list of potential options and the different dimensions of possible options. Local health communities developing the business case for interoperability are encouraged to combine the knowledge, experience and views of a wide range of stakeholders including – but not limited to – clinicians, managers, technical specialists, patients and commissioners. The following checklist may help when brainstorming potential options for the local interoperability programme: Scope of stakeholder involvement. This will be a function of geography and stakeholder support. While the benefits of interoperability will increase as more stakeholders are involved (because the patient/citizen history will be more complete), the risks of localism, protracted decision making and the costs of delivery also increase Scope of data flows. The more data sources that are included in the interoperability programme, the more complete the patient/citizen history will be and the benefits of clinical and administrative workflow will increase but the costs and risks of information exchange and system interfaces will also increase Incremental or new build strategy. A new interoperability programme could be developed to incrementally build on a mature interoperability site in a neighbouring geography or a decision could be made to start a ‘greenfield’ interoperability site
Interoperability-Business-Case-Template-v2.0-INTEROPen.docx