Search

Objectives: This paper aims to describe the added value of combining cost-effectiveness and ethical evaluations when the preferences of the decision maker toward cost-effectiveness evaluation outcomes are not known, with the French national neonatal screening of cystic fibrosis (CF) as a case-study., Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing four CF neonatal screening strategies, with or without DNA testing, was performed. Ethical positions toward their outcomes were described. In addition, a post-hoc analysis of the ethical issues being considered relevant from the decision-makers' perspective was conducted., Results: Two strategies were found equally cost-effective. Among them, choosing the non-DNA or a DNA-based strategy constrains the decision maker to render a judgement between different ethical issues or disagreements associated with the screening program., Conclusions: The analysis supports the relevance of combining cost-effectiveness and ethics evaluation in developing health policy, as a way to reveal or clarify the motives associated with health. The choice of the decision maker to favor the DNA-based strategy, which was not originally recommended, creates the opportunity to make explicit the role played by ethical issues in the decision.

Objectives: In the current pressured economic context, and to continue to treat the growing number of patients with high-quality standards, the first step is to have a better understanding of the costs related to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) treatment according to various renal replacement therapy, age, diabetes status, and clinical events., Methods: In order to estimate the direct costs of all adult ESRD patients, according to (RRT) modality, patient condition, and clinical events, data from the French national health insurance funds were used., Results: The mean monthly costs for the 47,862 stable prevalent patients (73 % of the population) varied substantially according to treatment modality (from 7300€ for in-center hemodialysis to 1100€ for a functioning renal graft) and to clinical event (8300€ for the first month of dialysis, 11,000€ for the last month before death, 22,800€ for the first month after renal transplantation). Mean monthly costs varied according to diabetic status and to age to a lesser extent., Conclusions: These results demonstrate, for the first time in France and in Europe, the importance of a dynamic view of renal care and the bias likely when comparing treatments in cross-sectional studies.

End-stage renal disease is a chronic state that may continue for many years before death. Patients may receive various modalities of renal replacement therapy that vary over time, which we describe as a treatment trajectory. The French health insurance system pays dialysis facilities and professionals various fixed fees according to the dialysis modalities they provide; fees are highest for hospital-based haemodialysis care, which treats around 58% of all dialysis patients. As in other European countries, a variety of dialysis modalities are used in France, and their weight and distribution differ from region to region. This study hypothesizes that some patients currently treated in hospital-based haemodialysis could be treated with another RRT modality without any increase in mortality risk. The aim of this study was to propose new care strategies so as to evaluate the medico-economic impact of replacing some hospital-based HD care by various other modalities for French health insurance. Care strategies were modelled using a statistical tool that predicts course and trajectories of a hypothetical cohort of news patients over a 15-year period. The results confirmed that the development of kidney transplantation in six sub-cohorts (according to age and diabetes status) is an efficient strategy, compared to all evaluated strategies. Strategies considering joint development of peritoneal dialysis and hospital-based haemodialysis are efficient for patients over 45 years but their feasibility has to be evaluated. Other alternative strategies also need to be considered because they are as effective and less costly than the current care practices., (Copyright © 2016 Association Société de néphrologie. Published by Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.)

Since 3rd October 2013 in France, drug companies applying for reimbursement of an innovative and expensive drug or medical device are required to provide the French National Authority for Health (HAS) with a cost-effectiveness assessment of their product. After a methodological audit of the economic evaluation submitted by the drug company, the Health Economics and Public Health Committee (CEESP) issues an opinion on the expected or observed cost-effectiveness. This opinion is sent to the Pricing Committee (CEPS) which determines the price of the product. After summarizing the French reimburse'!lent and pricing system, the objective of this article is to review the first 22 months of activity, in which HAS issued 30 cost-effectiveness opinions. The process, based on exchanges between drug companies and HAS, allowed the pricing committee to document the economic criterion in the majority of applications, while characterizing the degree of uncertainty of the results. For ten applications, major methodological concerns led the CEESP to reject the drug company's assessment.

Successful organ transplantation relies on several ancillary activities such as the identification of a compatible donor, organ allocation and procurement and the coordination of the transplant process. No existing study of the overall costs, in France, of these additional transplantation activities could be identified. This study determines the total additional costs of ancillary transplantation activities by comparing the costs of kidney transplantations with living donors against those using deceased donors. The data used are drawn from the 2013 public healthcare tariff calculations, PMSI recorded activity and transplant activity in 2012 as assessed and reported by the Agence de la biomédecine. The results show that, in 2012, additional transplant costs varied from 13835.44 € to 20050.67 € for a deceased donor and were 13601.66 € for a living donor. In conclusion, this study demonstrates that all the costs covered by National Health Insurance need to be taken into account in the economic impact evaluation of renal transplantation and during the development of this national priority activity., (Copyright © 2014 Association Société de néphrologie. Published by Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.)

The Haute Autorité de santé, in association with the Agence de la biomédecine, realizes, at the request of the Caisse nationale d'assurance maladie des travailleurs salariés and the Direction générale de l'offre de soins, a medical economic evaluation on treatment's alternative of terminal chronic renal insufficiency. To answer at this request, a multiannual working program was set up. A first part of this work concerned specifically the development of the kidney transplant. Indeed, the kidney transplant occupies a particular place among the various modalities of treatment of the terminal chronic renal insufficiency because it is at the same time the most effective on a medical plan and the least expensive, thus the most efficient. However, its development is constraint by the lack of the transplants and the number of patients registered on the national list of wait increases every year. The objective of this article is to present the method of work as well as the main identified axes of development., (Copyright © 2014 Association Société de néphrologie. Published by Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.)