Search

Background Persons with HIV and tuberculosis (TB) co-infection require transaminase monitoring while on hepatotoxic medications. A novel paper-based, point-of-care transaminase test is in development at an anticipated cost of $1 per test. Methods To project long-term clinical outcomes and estimate the cost-effectiveness of using a paper-based fingerstick test to monitor for drug-induced liver injury (DILI), as compared with automated testing and with no laboratory monitoring. The design was a decision analytic model, including deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Data sources were observational cohorts and a validation study of the paper-based test. The target population was HIV/TB co-infected persons in South Africa on antiretroviral therapy who were initiating TB therapy. Interventions: (1) clinical (no laboratory) monitoring; (2) monitoring using the paper-based test with a ≥120 IU/mL threshold for positivity; (3) monitoring using the paper-based test with a ≥200 IU/mL threshold for positivity; (4) monitoring using the paper-based test using 1 of 3 categories: <120 IU/mL, 120 to 200 IU/mL, and >200 IU/mL (“bin placement”); (5) monitoring using automated ALT testing using the same 3 categories (“automated testing”). The outcome measures were discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results The ICER of automated testing was $5180/QALY. Use of the paper-based test with the bin placement strategy was cost-effective compared with clinical monitoring alone. Conclusion At its current performance, monthly DILI monitoring by bin placement using the paper-based test was cost-effective, compared with clinical monitoring, in HIV/TB co-infected persons in South Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Value-based healthcare (VBHC) is a conceptual framework to improve the value of healthcare by health, care-process and economic outcomes. Benchmarking should provide useful information to identify best practices and therefore a good instrument to improve quality across healthcare organizations. This paper aims to provide a proof-of-concept of the feasibility of an international VBHC benchmarking in breast cancer, with the ultimate aim of being used to share best practices with a data-driven approach among healthcare organizations from different health systems. Methods In the VOICE community—a European healthcare centre cluster intending to address VBHC from theory to practice—information on patient-reported, clinical-related, care-process-related and economic-related outcomes were collected. Patient archetypes were identified using clustering techniques and an indicator set following a modified Delphi was defined. Benchmarking was performed using regression models controlling for patient archetypes and socio-demographic characteristics. Results Six hundred and ninety patients from six healthcare centres were included. A set of 50 health, care-process and economic indicators was distilled for benchmarking. Statistically significant differences across sites have been found in most health outcomes, half of the care-process indicators, and all economic indicators, allowing for identifying the best and worst performers. Conclusions To the best of our knowledge, this is the first international experience providing evidence to be used with VBHC benchmarking intention. Differences in indicators across healthcare centres should be used to identify best practices and improve healthcare quality following further research. Applied methods might help to move forward with VBHC benchmarking in other medical conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Cancer is a major public health problem in Rwanda and other low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While there have been some improvements in access to cancer treatment, the cost of care has increased, leading to financial toxicity and treatment barriers for many patients. This study explores the financial toxicity of cancer care in Rwanda. Methods This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted at 3 referral hospitals in Rwanda, which deliver most of the country's cancer care. Data were collected over 6 months from June 1 to December 1, 2022 by trained research assistants (RAs) using a modified validated data collection tool. RAs interviewed consecutive eligible patients with breast cancer, cervical cancer, colorectal cancer, Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma who were on active systemic therapy. The study aimed to identify sources of financial burden. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results 239 patients were included; 75% (n  = 180/239) were female and mean age was 51 years. Breast, cervix, and colorectal cancers were the most common diagnoses (42%, 100/239; 24%, 58/239; and 24%, 57/239, respectively) and 54% (n  = 129/239) were diagnosed with advanced stage (stages III-IV). Financial burden was high; 44% (n  = 106/239) of respondents sold property, 29% (n  =  70/239) asked for charity from public, family, or friends, and 16% (n  = 37/239) took loans with interest to fund cancer treatment. Conclusion Despite health insurance which covers many elements of cancer care, a substantial proportion of patients on anti-cancer treatment in Rwanda experience major financial toxicity. Novel health financing solutions are needed to ensure accessible and affordable cancer care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since 2017, Population Services International Myanmar (PSI/Myanmar) has been running Strategic Purchasing (SP) clinics in Hlegu and Shwepyithar townships in Yangon, Myanmar. In the project, Population Services International Myanmar simulated the role of a purchaser and contracted SP clinics through a capitation payment scheme. The project aimed to reduce the health-related financial burden of poor populations in the catchment area, by having them registered under respective SP clinics for access to a package of essential health services for a minimal fixed co-payment, as a replacement for usual fee-for-service payments. Four longitudinal surveys of households registered under SP clinics were conducted in 2017, 2018 and 2019. Among 2506 registered households, 867 households sought some health care in all surveys, resulting in 3468 observations. Multivariable linear mixed-effect regression model was used to analyse the changes in out-of-pocket expenditure for health care in relation to household capacity to pay (OOPCTP). The utilization of SP clinics increased over time, and the rates were much higher in Hlegu (20.5% in baseline to 61.9% in round three) compared with those in Shwepyithar (0.2 to 7.9%). Compared with the baseline assessment, household OOPCTP decreased significantly during and after the implementation (0.76 times in round one, 0.80 in round two and 0.82 in round three; P < 0.001). Households in Shwepyithar with less utilization of SP clinics had 1.8 times higher OOPCTP compared with those in Hlegu (1.82, 95% CI 1.58, 2.09; P < 0.001). Household direct expenditures on care-seeking and family planning were up to 50% lower among those who used SP clinics. Our study highlighted that capitation-based health financing schemes could successfully lower out-of-pocket health expenditures among the poor. Optimal utilization of services was paramount in the successful implementation of such programmes. Therefore, for the effective scale-up of new health financing schemes, service utilization rates should be carefully monitored as one of the critical indicators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Empirical research suggests that household debt and payment difficulties are detrimental to mental health. Despite well-known measurement problems that may contaminate analyses using subjective self-reported health measures, our knowledge is very limited concerning the effect of payment difficulties on 'objective' measures of mental health. Moreover, few studies use longitudinal data to examine the relationship. This study combines rich survey data and longitudinal data from administrative registers on a representative sample of the Swedish population to examine the relationship between payment difficulties and subjective and objective measures of mental health. Methods We use data from a large survey of Swedish inhabitants (The Swedish Living Conditions Surveys) combined with data from administrative registers. We investigate both directions of the relationship between mental ill health and payment difficulties, controlling for previous mental health status and previous experiences of payment difficulties. We compare the association between payment difficulties and a self-reported measure of anxiety with the associations between payment difficulties and objective measures of mental ill health from a register of psychopharmaceutical drug consumption. Results Payment difficulties associate with subjectively reported mental ill health, but less to psychopharmaca use. For objective measures, we find stronger evidence of a link running from mental ill health to later payment difficulties. Conclusions Self-reported and objective measures of mental problems may convey different messages regarding the impact of payment difficulties on mental health. Policy measures depend on whether the primary target group is individuals with severe mental problems or individuals with mild anxiety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Question: How do households recover financially from direct out-of-pocket payment for government subsidized ART?Summary Answer: After a mean of 3.8 years, there was poor recovery from initiated financial coping strategies with the poorest households being disproportionatley affected.What Is Known Already: Out-of-pocket payment for health services can create financial burdens for households and inequities in access to care. A previous study conducted at a public-academic institution in South Africa documented that patient co-payment for one cycle of ART resulted in catastrophic expenditure for one in five households, and more frequently among the poorest, requiring diverse financial coping strategies to offset costs.Study Design, Size, Duration: An observational follow-up study was conducted ~4 years later to assess financial recovery among the 135 couples who had participated in this previous study. Data were collected over 12 months from 73 informants.Participants/materials, Setting, Method: The study was conducted at a level three referral hospital in the public-academic health sector of South Africa. At this institution ART is subsidized but requires patient co-payments. A purpose-built questionnaire capturing socio-economic information and recovery from financial coping strategies which had been activated was administered to all informants. Financial recovery was defined as the resolution of strategies initiated for the specific purpose of covering the original ART cycle. Results were analysed by strategy and household with the latter including analysis by tertiles based on socio-economic status at the time of the original expenditure. In addition to descriptive statistics, the Pearson Chi squared test was used to determine differences between socioeconomic tertiles and associations between recovery and other variables.Main Results and the Role Of Chance: The participation rate in this follow-up study was 54.1% with equal representation from the three socio-economic tertiles. The average duration of follow-up was 46.1 months (±9.78 SD) and respondents' mean age was 42 years (range 31-52). The recovery rate was below 50% for four of five strategies evaluated: 23.1% of households had re-purchased a sold asset; 23.5% had normalized a previous reduction in household spending, 33.8% had regained their savings, and 48.7% were no longer bolstering income through additional work. Two-thirds of households (60.0%) had repaid all loans and debts. The poorest households showed lower rates of recovery when compared to households in the richest tertile. Complete recovery from all strategies initiated was reported by only 10 households (13.7%): 1 of 19 in the lowest tertile, 3 of 30 in the middle and by 6 of 24 households in the richest tertile (P > 0.05). No association was found between the degree of financial recovery and additional cost burdens incurred, including related to babies born; or between the degree of recovery and ongoing pursuit of ART.Limitations, Reasons For Caution: The sample size was limited. The participation rate was just over 50%. Results were dependent on participants' narrative and recall.Wider Implications Of the Findings: The willingness of patients to pay for ART does not necessarily imply the ability to pay. As a result, the lack of comprehensive third-party funding for ART can create immediate and long-term financial hardship which is more pronounced among poorer households. While more data on the impact of out-of-pocket payment for ART are needed to illustrate the problem in other low resource settings, the results from South Africa provide useful information for similar developing countries. The current absence of more extensive data should therefore not be a barrier to the promotion of financial risk protection for infertile couples, especially the poorest, in need of ART.Study Funding/competing Interest(s): The study was supported by a Masters Student Grant from the Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town. The authors had no competing interests.Trial Registration Number: Not applicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: We sought to compare outcomes and costs of a stepwise approach to transvenous lead extraction (TLE) involving laser-assisted sheaths or mechanical polypropylene sheaths, with/without crossover.Methods and Results: We prospectively included patients who underwent TLE (between August 2013 and December 2014) as part of a stepwise approach involving simple traction, lead snaring, and sheath-assisted dissection; all of these patients underwent a first-line polypropylene-sheath-extraction approach (Group A). The comparison group (Group B) was consecutive patients who had undergone TLE before August 2013, during which laser-assisted sheath extraction was the first-line approach. The number of patients in Group B was adjusted to match the number who eventually needed sheaths in Group A. Procedural data, outcomes, and costs were compared between groups (comparison of approaches) and in patients who needed sheath-assisted extraction (comparison of techniques). Overall, 521 leads were extracted (131 patients in Group A, 104 in Group B). Radiological and clinical success rates were similar; crossover from polypropylene to laser sheaths was needed in 10 patients in Group A (vs. none in Group B). Radiological (P< 0.001) and clinical (P= 0.01) success rates were higher and were achieved with a lower radiation exposure (P= 0.03) with laser sheaths in patients (60 in each group) who needed sheath-assisted extraction. Complication rates were similar in both groups (P= 0.66) but two deaths occurred in Group B. The laser approach had higher material cost (P= 0.002).Conclusions: Although laser-assisted TLE was more effective than polypropylene sheath-assisted TLE, the latter was associated with fewer complications and was more cost-effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Question: What is the cost-effectiveness of lifestyle intervention preceding infertility treatment in obese infertile women?Summary Answer: Lifestyle intervention preceding infertility treatment as compared to prompt infertility treatment in obese infertile women is not a cost-effective strategy in terms of healthy live birth rate within 24 months after randomization, but is more likely to be cost-effective using a longer follow-up period and live birth rate as endpoint.What Is Known Already: In infertile couples, obesity decreases conception chances. We previously showed that lifestyle intervention prior to infertility treatment in obese infertile women did not increase the healthy singleton vaginal live birth rate at term, but increased natural conceptions, especially in anovulatory women. Cost-effectiveness analyses could provide relevant additional information to guide decisions regarding offering a lifestyle intervention to obese infertile women.Study Design, Size, Duration: The cost-effectiveness of lifestyle intervention preceding infertility treatment compared to prompt infertility treatment was evaluated based on data of a previous RCT, the LIFEstyle study. The primary outcome for effectiveness was the vaginal birth of a healthy singleton at term within 24 months after randomization (the healthy live birth rate). The economic evaluation was performed from a hospital perspective and included direct medical costs of the lifestyle intervention, infertility treatments, medication and pregnancy in the intervention and control group. In addition, we performed exploratory cost-effectiveness analyses of scenarios with additional effectiveness outcomes (overall live birth within 24 months and overall live birth conceived within 24 months) and of subgroups, i.e. of ovulatory and anovulatory women, women <36 years and ≥36 years of age and of completers of the lifestyle intervention. Bootstrap analyses were performed to assess the uncertainty surrounding cost-effectiveness.Participants/materials, Settings, Methods: Infertile women with a BMI of ≥29 kg/m2 (no upper limit) were allocated to a 6-month lifestyle intervention programme preceding infertility treatment (intervention group, n = 290) or to prompt infertility treatment (control group, n = 287). After excluding women who withdrew informed consent or who were lost to follow-up we included 280 women in the intervention group and 284 women in the control group in the analysis.Main Results and the Role Of Chance: Total mean costs per woman in the intervention group within 24 months after randomization were €4324 (SD €4276) versus €5603 (SD €4632) in the control group (cost difference of -€1278, P < 0.05). Healthy live birth rates were 27 and 35% in the intervention group and the control group, respectively (effect difference of -8.1%, P < 0.05), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €15 845 per additional percentage increase of the healthy live birth rate. Mean costs per healthy live birth event were €15 932 in the intervention group and €15 912 in the control group. Exploratory scenario analyses showed that after changing the effectiveness outcome to all live births conceived within 24 months, irrespective of delivery within or after 24 months, cost-effectiveness of the lifestyle intervention improved. Using this effectiveness outcome, the probability that lifestyle intervention preceding infertility treatment was cost-effective in anovulatory women was 40%, in completers of the lifestyle intervention 39%, and in women ≥36 years 29%.Limitations, Reasons For Caution: In contrast to the study protocol, we were not able to perform the analysis from a societal perspective. Besides the primary outcome of the LIFEstyle study, we performed exploratory analyses using outcomes observed at longer follow-up times and we evaluated subgroups of women; the trial was not powered on these additional outcomes or subgroup analyses.Wider Implications Of the Findings: Cost-effectiveness of a lifestyle intervention is more likely for longer follow-up times, and with live births conceived within 24 months as the effectiveness outcome. This effect was most profound in anovulatory women, in completers of the lifestyle intervention and in women ≥36 years old. This result indicates that the follow-up period of lifestyle interventions in obese infertile women is important. The scenario analyses performed in this study suggest that offering and reimbursing lifestyle intervention programmes in certain patient categories may be cost-effective and it provides directions for future research in this field.Study Funding/competing Interest(s): The study was supported by a grant from ZonMw, the Dutch Organization for Health Research and Development (50-50110-96-518). The department of obstetrics and gynaecology of the UMCG received an unrestricted educational grant from Ferring pharmaceuticals BV, The Netherlands. B.W.J.M. is a consultant for ObsEva, Geneva.Trial Registration Number: The LIFEstyle RCT was registered at the Dutch trial registry (NTR 1530). http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC = 1530. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim of this prospective clinical study was to derive the absolute and relative costs of cone beam CT (CBCT) and panoramic imaging before removal of an impacted mandibular third molar. Furthermore, the study aimed to analyse the influence of different cost-setting scenarios on the outcome of the absolute and relative costs and the incremental costs related to surgery. Methods: A randomized clinical trial compared complications following surgical removal of a mandibular third molar, where the pre-operative diagnostic method had been panoramic imaging or CBCT. The resources implied in the two methods were measured with health economic tools. The primary outcome was total costs defined as the sum of absolute imaging costs and incremental surgery-related costs. The basic variables were capital costs, operational costs, radiological costs, radiographic costs, overheads and patient resource utilization. Differences in resources used for surgical and post-surgical management were calculated for each patient. Results: Converted to monetary units, the total costs for panoramic imaging equalized €49.29 and for CBCT examination €184.44. Modifying effects on this outcome such as differences in surgery time, treatment time for complications, pre- and post-surgical medication, sickness absence, specialist treatment and hospitalization were not statistically significant between the two diagnostic method groups. Conclusions: Costs for a CBCT examination were approximately four times the costs for panoramic imaging when used prior to removal of a mandibular third molar. The use of CBCT did not change the resources used for surgery, post-surgical treatment and patient complication management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Food allergy is a recognized health problem, but little has been reported on its cost for health services. The EuroPrevall project was a European study investigating the patterns, prevalence and socio-economic cost of food allergy. Aims: To investigate the health service cost for food-allergic Europeans and the relationship between severity and cost of illness. Methods: Participants recruited through EuroPrevall studies in a case–control study in four countries, and cases only in five countries, completed a validated economics questionnaire. Individuals with possible food allergy were identified by clinical history, and those with food-specific immunoglobulin E were defined as having probable allergy. Data on resource use were used to estimate total health care costs of illness. Mean costs were compared in the case–control cohorts. Regression analysis was conducted on cases from all 9 countries to assess impact of country, severity and age group. Results: Food-allergic individuals had higher health care costs than controls. The mean annual cost of health care was international dollars (I$)2016 for food-allergic adults and I$1089 for controls, a difference of I$927 (95% confidence interval I$324–I$1530). A similar result was found for adults in each country, and for children, and was not sensitive to baseline demographic differences. Cost was significantly related to severity of illness in cases in nine countries. Conclusions: Food allergy is associated with higher health care costs. Severity of allergic symptoms is a key explanatory factor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of the Study: To examine the components of cost that drive increased total costs after a medical fall over time, stratified by injury severity. Design and Methods: We used 2004–2007 cost and utilization data for persons enrolled in an integrated care delivery system. We used a longitudinal cohort study design, where each individual provides 2–3 years of administrative data grouped into 3-month intervals relative to an index date. We identified 8,969 medical fallers through International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, codes and E-Codes and used 8,956 nonfaller controls, identified through age and gender frequency matching. Total costs were partitioned into 7 components: inpatient, outpatient, emergency, radiology, pharmacy, postacute care, and “other.” Results: The large increase in costs after a hospitalized fall is mainly associated with inpatient and postacute care components. The spike in costs after a nonhospitalized fall is attributable to outpatient and “other” (e.g., ambulatory surgery or community health services) components. Hospitalized fallers’ inpatient, emergency, postacute care, outpatient, and radiology costs are not always greater than those for nonhospitalized fallers. Implications: Components associated with increased costs after a medical fall vary over time and by injury severity. Future studies should compare if delivering certain acute and postacute health services improve health and reduce cost trajectories after a medical fall more than others. Additionally, since the older adult population and the problem of falls are growing, health care delivery systems should develop standardized methodology to monitor medical fall rates. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]