Business-And-Management Assignment Sample
Q1:
Answer :Q.1 Ans. Here's how the average total monthly doses (Med A + Med B combined) changed across the switch months:
| Month | Corrected Avg Total Dose | Number of Patients |
| September | 55,919.84 | 71 |
| October | 50,894.36 | 10 |
| November | No patients switched | 0 |
Key observations:
There was a slight decrease in average total monthly dose from September to October (about 10% reduction)
Most patients (71) switched in September
A smaller group (10) switched in October
No patients switched in November
The September group had higher average total monthly doses compared to the October group
This suggests that the earlier switches (September) involved patients with higher total monthly doses compared to those who switched later (October).
Q1:
Answer :Q.2 Ans. Here's the breakdown of how the second Med B doses compared to the first doses:
For September switches:
| Category | % |
| Same dose | 4.90% |
| Higher dose | 7.00% |
| Lower dose | 8.50% |
| Zero dose | 79.60% |
| Total Patients | 71 |
For October switches:
| Category | % |
| Same dose | 25.00% |
| Higher dose | 30.00% |
| Lower dose | 5.00% |
| Zero dose | 40.00% |
| Total Patients | 10 |
Combined (September + October):
| Category | % |
| Same dose | 7.40% |
| Higher dose | 10.50% |
| Lower dose | 8.10% |
| Zero dose | 74.10% |
| Total Patients | 81 |
Key observations:
Most September patients (79.6%) did not receive a second Med B dose.
October patients had better continuation rates (60% got a second dose).
October switches were more likely to receive a higher or same dose.
Q1:
Answer :Q.3 Ans. For patients who switched from Med A to Med B:
Average LAB B value while on Med A: 10.85
Average LAB B value while on Med B: 10.98
This shows a very slight increase in LAB B values after switching from Med A to Med B (difference of approximately 0.13 units), suggesting that LAB B values remained relatively stable across the medication switch.
Below are the detailed calculations and outputs:
The summary shows that 81 patients switched from Med A to Med B.
In the Med A period, there were 789 LAB B measurements (from 79 patients) with an average LAB B value of 10.821759669193046.
In the Med B period, there were 111 LAB B measurements (from 53 patients) with an average LAB B value of 10.930188679245282.
Overall LAB B statistics for the Med A period are: mean = 10.85171102661597, median = 10.9, standard deviation = 1.4797920479651523, min = 5.3, and max = 16.1.
For the Med B period, the overall statistics are: mean = 10.977477477477473, median = 10.8, standard deviation = 1.6427075590281197, min = 6.9, and max = Max: 15.4.
| Period | Number of Patients | Number of LAB B Measurements | Mean LAB B | Median LAB B | Std Dev | Min LAB B | Max LAB B |
| Med A Period | 79 | 789 | 10.85 | 10.9 | 1.48 | 5.3 | 16.1 |
| Med B Period | 53 | 111 | 10.98 | 10.8 | 1.64 | 6.9 | 15.4 |
Q.4 Ans. Based on the assumption that higher usage of either medication is associated with higher LAB B values, our analyses from questions 9 and 10—which show that patients on Med B have only a very slightly higher LAB B value than those on Med A—suggest the following:
Marginal LAB B Increase: Even if more medication generally raises LAB B values, the observed difference between Med A and Med B in switched patients is very small (around 0.13 units on average). This indicates that, despite a potential dose–response relationship, the actual difference in laboratory response between the two medications is minimal.
Breakeven Implications: In a breakeven analysis, you’d compare both the clinical benefit and the cost of the medications. If Med B were priced higher, you’d expect its benefit (here reflected in LAB B levels) to be substantially greater to justify the additional cost. However, the marginal difference suggests that Med B might only command a premium if its overall cost structure could be adjusted (or if other factors favor it, such as reduced side effects or improved long‐term outcomes). In other words, to reach the breakeven point, the price of Med B would likely need to be very close to that of Med A or—if the dosage used is higher—Med B’s additional cost would need to be offset by other improvements in patient outcomes.
Clinical vs Economic Trade-off: The small increase in LAB B values may not justify a higher breakeven price for Med B unless other clinical benefits are present. In cost-effectiveness terms, even if there is a dose–response relationship, the breakeven price point (the price at which the extra cost of Med B equals its marginal benefit) would remain low because the additional LAB B benefit is minor.
In summary, if more of either medication only produces a marginal LAB B increase, then the pricing for Med B should be set very competitively relative to Med A to remain economically viable at breakeven—unless other benefits can be demonstrated.