Search

Objective: Heroin use in the United States has reached epidemic proportions. The objective of this paper is to estimate the annual societal cost of heroin use disorder in the United States in 2015 US dollars. Methods: An analytic model was created that included incarceration and crime; treatment for heroin use disorder; chronic infectious diseases (HIV, Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, and Tuberculosis) and their treatments; treatment of neonatal abstinence syndrome; lost productivity; and death by heroin overdose. Results: Using literature-based estimates to populate the model, the cost of heroin use disorder was estimated to be $51.2 billion in 2015 US dollars ($50,799 per heroin user). One-way sensitivity analyses showed that overall cost estimates were sensitive to the number of heroin users, cost of HCV treatment, and cost of incarcerating heroin users. Conclusion: The annual cost of heroin use disorder to society in the United States emphasizes the need for sustained investment in healthcare and non-healthcare related strategies that reduce the likelihood of abuse and provide care and support for users to overcome the disorder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In 2016, for the very first time, the Ministry of Health in Zambia implemented a reactive outbreak response to control the spread of cholera and vaccinated at-risk populations with a single dose of Shancol—an oral cholera vaccine (OCV). This study aimed to assess the costs of cholera illness and determine the cost-effectiveness of the 2016 vaccination campaign. Methodology: From April to June 2017, we conducted a retrospective cost and cost-effectiveness analysis in three peri-urban areas of Lusaka. To estimate costs of illness from a household perspective, a systematic random sample of 189 in-patients confirmed with V. cholera were identified from Cholera Treatment Centre registers and interviewed for out-of-pocket costs. Vaccine delivery and health systems costs were extracted from financial records at the District Health Office and health facilities. The cost of cholera treatment was derived by multiplying the subsidized cost of drugs by the quantity administered to patients during hospitalisation. The cost-effectiveness analysis measured incremental cost-effectiveness ratio—cost per case averted, cost per life saved and cost per DALY averted—for a single dose OCV. Results: The mean cost per administered vaccine was US$1.72. Treatment costs per hospitalized episode were US$14.49–US$18.03 for patients ≤15 years old and US$17.66–US$35.16 for older patients. Whereas households incurred costs on non-medical items such as communication, beverages, food and transport during illness, a large proportion of medical costs were borne by the health system. Assuming vaccine effectiveness of 88.9% and 63%, a life expectancy of 62 years and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita of US$1,500, the costs per case averted were estimated US$369–US$532. Costs per life year saved ranged from US$18,515–US$27,976. The total cost per DALY averted was estimated between US$698–US$1,006 for patients ≤15 years old and US$666–US$1,000 for older patients. Conclusion: Our study determined that reactive vaccination campaign with a single dose of Shancol for cholera control in densely populated areas of Lusaka was cost-effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rising non-communicable diseases (NCDs) coupled with increasing injuries have resulted in a significant increase in health spending in India. While out-of-pocket expenditure remains the major source of health care financing in India (two-thirds of the total health spending), the financial burden varies enormously across diseases and by the economic well-being of the households. Though prior studies have examined the variation in disease pattern, little is known about the financial risk to the families by type of diseases in India. In this context, the present study examines disease-specific out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE), catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) and distress health financing. Methods and materials: Unit data from the 71st round of the National Sample Survey Organization (2014) was used for this study. OOPE is defined as health spending on hospitalization net of reimbursement, and CHE is defined as household health spending exceeding 10% of household consumption expenditure. Distress health financing is defined as a situation when a household has to borrow money or sell their property/assets or when it gets contributions from friends/relatives to meet its health care expenses. OOPE was estimated for 16 selected diseases and across three broad categories- communicable diseases, NCDs and injuries. Multivariate logistic regression was used to understand the determinants of distress financing and CHE. Results: Mean OOPE on hospitalization was INR 19,210 and was the highest for cancer (INR 57,232) followed by heart diseases (INR 40,947). About 28% of the households incurred CHE and faced distress financing. Among all the diseases, cancer caused the highest CHE (79%) and distress financing (43%). More than one-third of the inpatients reported distressed financing for heart diseases, neurological disorders, genito urinary problems, musculoskeletal diseases, gastro-intestinal problems and injuries. The likelihood of incurring distress financing was 3.2 times higher for those hospitalized for cancer (OR 3.23; 95% CI: 2.62–3.99) and 2.6 times for tuberculosis patients (OR 2.61; 95% CI: 2.06–3.31). A large proportion of households who had reported distress financing also incurred CHE. Recommendations: Free treatment for cancer and heart diseases is recommended for the vulnerable sections of the society. Risk-pooling and social security mechanisms based on contributions from both households as well as the central and state governments can reduce the financial burden of diseases and avert households from distress health financing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Tuberculosis (TB) patients face substantial delays prior to treatment initiation, and out of pocket (OOP) expenditures often surpass the economic productivity of the household. We evaluated the pre-diagnostic cost and health seeking behaviour of new adult pulmonary TB patients registered at Primary Health Centres (PHCs) in Vellore district, Tamil Nadu, India. Methods: This descriptive study, part of a randomised controlled trial conducted in three rural Tuberculosis Units from Dec 2012 to Dec 2015, collected data on number of health facilities, dates of visits prior to the initiation of anti-tuberculosis treatment, and direct OOP medical costs associated with TB diagnosis. Logistic regression analysis examined the factors associated with delays in treatment initiation and OOP expenditures. Results: Of 880 TB patients interviewed, 34.7% presented to public health facilities and 65% patients sought private health facilities as their first point of care. The average monthly individual income was $77.79 (SD 57.14). About 69% incurred some pre-treatment costs at an average of $39.74. Overall, patients experienced a median of 6 days (3–11 IQR) of time to treatment initiation and 21 days (10–30 IQR) of health systems delay. Age ≤ 40 years (aOR: 1.73; CI: 1.22–2.44), diabetes (aOR: 1.63; CI: 1.08–2.44) and first visit to a private health facility (aOR: 17.2; CI: 11.1–26.4) were associated with higher direct OOP medical costs, while age ≤ 40 years (aOR: 0.64; CI: 0.48–0.85) and first visit to private health facility (aOR: 1.79, CI: 1.34–2.39) were associated with health systems delay. Conclusion: The majority of rural TB patients registering at PHCs visited private health facilities first and incurred substantial direct OOP medical costs and delays prior to diagnosis and anti-tuberculosis treatment initiation. This study highlights the need for PHCs to be made as the preferred choice for first point of contact, to combat TB more efficiently. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over half a century ago, McKeown and colleagues proposed that economics was a major contributor to the decline of infectious diseases, including respiratory tuberculosis, during the 19th and 20th centuries. Since then, there is no consensus among researchers as to the factors responsible for the mortality decline. Using the case study of the islands of Malta and Gozo, we examine the relationship of economics, in particular, the cost of living (Fisher index) and its relationship to the secular trends of tuberculosis mortality. Notwithstanding the criticism that has been directed at McKeown, we present results that improvement in economics is the most parsimonious explanation for the decline of tuberculosis mortality. We reaffirmed that the reproductively aged individuals were most at risk of dying of tuberculosis, seeing that 70 to 90% of all deaths due to tuberculosis occurred between the ages of 15 and 45. There was a clear sex differential in deaths in that, prior to 1930, rates in females were generally higher than males. During times of extreme hardship, the sex differential was exacerbated. Over the course of World War I, the sex gap in tuberculosis rates increased until peaking in 1918 when there was also the influenza pandemic. The heightened differential was most likely a result of gendered roles as opposed to biological differences since female tuberculosis rates again surpassed male rates in 1945 during World War II. Respiratory tuberculosis in both urban and rural settlements (in Malta proper) was significantly influenced by the Fisher index, which explains approximately 61% of the variation in TB death rates (R = 0.78; p<0.0001). In Gozo, there was no significant impact on respiratory tuberculosis (R = 0.23; p = 0.25), most likely a consequence of the island’s isolation, a self-sufficient economy and limited exposure to tuberculosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]