Search

Background: The efficacy and safety of antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis has been established at long-term follow-up with the majority of recurrences shown to occur within the first year. Overall costs of antibiotics are significantly lower compared with appendectomy at short-term follow-up, but long-term durability of these cost savings is unclear. The study objective was to compare the long-term overall costs of antibiotic therapy versus appendectomy in the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in the APPAC (APPendicitis ACuta) trial at 5 years. Methods and findings: This multicentre, non-inferiority randomized clinical trial randomly assigned 530 adult patients with CT-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis to appendectomy or antibiotic treatment at six Finnish hospitals. All major costs during the 5-year follow-up were recorded, whether generated by the initial visit and subsequent treatment or possible recurrent appendicitis. Between November 2009 and June 2012, 273 patients were randomized to appendectomy and 257 to antibiotics. The overall costs of appendectomy were 1.4 times higher (p<0.001) (€5716; 95% CI: €5510 to €5925) compared with antibiotic therapy (€4171; 95% CI: €3879 to €4463) resulting in cost savings of €1545 per patient (95% CI: €1193 to €1899; p<0.001) in the antibiotic group. At 5 years, the majority (61%, n = 156) of antibiotic group patients did not undergo appendectomy. Conclusions: At 5-year follow-up antibiotic treatment resulted in significantly lower overall costs compared with appendectomy. As the majority of appendicitis recurrences occur within the first year after the initial antibiotic treatment, these results suggest that treating uncomplicated acute appendicitis with antibiotics instead of appendectomy results in lower overall costs even at longer-term follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Drug resistant-tuberculosis is a growing burden on the South African health care budget. In response the National Department of Health implemented two important strategies in 2011; universal access to drug-sensitivity testing for rifampicin with Xpert MTB/RIF as the first-line diagnostic test for TB; and decentralization of treatment for RR/MDR-TB to improve access and reduce costs of treatment. Objective: Estimate the costs by treatment outcome of decentralized care for rifampicin and multi-drug resistant tuberculosis under routine conditions. The study was set at an outpatient drug resistant-tuberculosis treatment facility at a public academic hospital in Johannesburg, South Africa. During the study period 18–24 month long course treatment was offered for rifampicin-resistant and multi-drug-resistant tuberculosis. Methods: Data are from a prospective observational cohort study. Costs of treatment were estimated from the provider perspective using bottom-up micro-costing. Costs were estimated as patient-level resource use multiplied by the unit cost of the resource. Clinic visits, drugs, laboratory tests, and total days hospitalized were collected from patients' medical records. Staff time was estimated through a time and motion study. A successful treatment outcome was defined as cure or completion of the regimen. Results: We enrolled 124 patients with 52% having a successful outcome. The average total cost/patient for all patients was $3,430 and $4,530 for successfully treated patients. The largest contributors to total cost across all outcomes were drugs (43%) and staff (28%). The average cost to achieve a successful outcome including all patients who started treatment ("production cost") in the cohort is $6,684. Conclusions: Decentralized, outpatient RR/MDR-TB care under South Africa's 2011 strategy costs 74% less per patient than the previous strategy of inpatient care. The treatment cost of RR/MDR-TB is primarily driven by drug and staff costs, which are in turn dependant on treatment length. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Providing HIV testing at health facilities remains the most common approach to ensuring access to HIV treatment and prevention services for the millions of undiagnosed HIV-infected individuals in sub-Saharan Africa. We sought to explore the costs of providing these services across three southern African countries with high HIV burden. Methods: Primary costing studies were undertaken in 54 health facilities providing HIV testing services (HTS) in Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Routinely collected monitoring and evaluation data for the health facilities were extracted to estimate the costs per individual tested and costs per HIV-positive individual identified. Costs are presented in 2016 US dollars. Sensitivity analysis explored key drivers of costs. Results: Health facilities were testing on average 2290 individuals annually, albeit with wide variations. The mean cost per individual tested was US$5.03.9 in Malawi, US$4.24 in Zambia and US$8.79 in Zimbabwe. The mean cost per HIV-positive individual identified was US$79.58, US$73.63 and US$178.92 in Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe respectively. Both cost estimates were sensitive to scale of testing, facility staffing levels and the costs of HIV test kits. Conclusions: Health facility based HIV testing remains an essential service to meet HIV universal access goals. The low costs and potential for economies of scale suggests an opportunity for further scale-up. However low uptake in many settings suggests that demand creation or alternative testing models may be needed to achieve economies of scale and reach populations less willing to attend facility based services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]