Cost-effectiveness of group medical visits and microfinance interventions versus usual care to manage hypertension in Kenya: a secondary modelling analysis of data from the Bridging Income Generation with Group Integrated Care (BIGPIC) trial.

IF 19.9 1区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Lancet Global Health Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI:10.1016/S2214-109X(24)00188-8
Junxing Chay, Rebecca J Su, Jemima H Kamano, Benjamin Andama, Gerald S Bloomfield, Allison K Delong, Carol R Horowitz, Diana Menya, Richard Mugo, Vitalis Orango, Sonak D Pastakia, Cleophas Wanyonyi, Rajesh Vedanthan, Eric A Finkelstein
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of group medical visits and microfinance interventions versus usual care to manage hypertension in Kenya: a secondary modelling analysis of data from the Bridging Income Generation with Group Integrated Care (BIGPIC) trial.","authors":"Junxing Chay, Rebecca J Su, Jemima H Kamano, Benjamin Andama, Gerald S Bloomfield, Allison K Delong, Carol R Horowitz, Diana Menya, Richard Mugo, Vitalis Orango, Sonak D Pastakia, Cleophas Wanyonyi, Rajesh Vedanthan, Eric A Finkelstein","doi":"10.1016/S2214-109X(24)00188-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Bridging Income Generation with Group Integrated Care (BIGPIC) trial in rural Kenya showed that integrating usual care with group medical visits or microfinance interventions reduced systolic blood pressure and cardiovascular risk in participants. We aimed to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of three BIGPIC interventions for a modelled cohort and by sex, as well as the cost of implementing these interventions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For this analysis, we used data collected during the BIGPIC trial, a four-group, cluster-randomised trial conducted in the western Kenyan catchment area of the Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare. BIGPIC enrolled participants from 24 rural health facilities in rural western Kenya aged 35 years or older with either increased blood pressure or diabetes. Participants were assigned to receive either usual care, group medical visits, microfinance, or a combination of group medical visits and microfinance (GMV-MF). Our model estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness of the three BIGPIC interventions via seven health states (ie, a hypertensive state, five chronic cardiovascular-disease states, and a death state) by simulating transitions between health states for a hypothetical cohort of individuals with hypertension on the basis of QRISK3 scores. In every cycle, participants accrued costs and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) associated with their health state. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for the entire modelled cohort and by sex by dividing the incremental cost by the incremental effectiveness of the next most expensive intervention. The main outcome of this analysis was ICERs for each intervention evaluated. This analysis is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02501746).</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Between Feb 6, 2017, and Dec 29, 2019, 2890 people were recruited to the BIGPIC trial. 2020 (69·9%) of 2890 participants were female and 870 (30·1%) were male. At baseline, mean QRISK3 score was 11·5 (95% CI 11·1-11·9) for the trial population, 11·9 (11·5-12·2) for male participants, and 11·3 (11·0-11·6) for female participants. For the population of Kenya, group medical visits were estimated to cost US$7 more per individual than usual care and result in 0·005 more DALYs averted (ICER $1455 per DALY averted). Microfinance was estimated to cost $19 more than group medical visits but was only estimated to avert 0·001 more DALYs. Relative to group medical visits, GMV-MF was estimated to cost $29 more and avert 0·009 more DALYs ($3235 per DALY averted). Relative to usual care, GMV-MF was estimated to cost $37 more and avert 0·014 more DALYs ($2601 per DALY averted). In the first year of the intervention, usual care was estimated to be the least expensive intervention to implement ($87 per participant; $10 238 per health-facility catchment area [HFCA]), then group medical visits ($99 per participant; $12 268 per HFCA), then microfinance ($120 per participant; $14 172 per HFCA), with GMV-MF estimated to be the most expensive intervention to implement ($139 per participant; $16 913 per HFCA).</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Group medical visits and GMV-MF were estimated to be cost-effective strategies to improve blood-pressure control in rural Kenya. However, which intervention to pursue depends on resource availability. Policy makers should consider these factors, in addition to sex differences in programme effectiveness, when selecting optimal implementation strategies.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>US National Institutes of Health.</p>","PeriodicalId":48783,"journal":{"name":"Lancet Global Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":19.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11303878/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lancet Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(24)00188-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Bridging Income Generation with Group Integrated Care (BIGPIC) trial in rural Kenya showed that integrating usual care with group medical visits or microfinance interventions reduced systolic blood pressure and cardiovascular risk in participants. We aimed to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of three BIGPIC interventions for a modelled cohort and by sex, as well as the cost of implementing these interventions.

Methods: For this analysis, we used data collected during the BIGPIC trial, a four-group, cluster-randomised trial conducted in the western Kenyan catchment area of the Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare. BIGPIC enrolled participants from 24 rural health facilities in rural western Kenya aged 35 years or older with either increased blood pressure or diabetes. Participants were assigned to receive either usual care, group medical visits, microfinance, or a combination of group medical visits and microfinance (GMV-MF). Our model estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness of the three BIGPIC interventions via seven health states (ie, a hypertensive state, five chronic cardiovascular-disease states, and a death state) by simulating transitions between health states for a hypothetical cohort of individuals with hypertension on the basis of QRISK3 scores. In every cycle, participants accrued costs and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) associated with their health state. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for the entire modelled cohort and by sex by dividing the incremental cost by the incremental effectiveness of the next most expensive intervention. The main outcome of this analysis was ICERs for each intervention evaluated. This analysis is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02501746).

Findings: Between Feb 6, 2017, and Dec 29, 2019, 2890 people were recruited to the BIGPIC trial. 2020 (69·9%) of 2890 participants were female and 870 (30·1%) were male. At baseline, mean QRISK3 score was 11·5 (95% CI 11·1-11·9) for the trial population, 11·9 (11·5-12·2) for male participants, and 11·3 (11·0-11·6) for female participants. For the population of Kenya, group medical visits were estimated to cost US$7 more per individual than usual care and result in 0·005 more DALYs averted (ICER $1455 per DALY averted). Microfinance was estimated to cost $19 more than group medical visits but was only estimated to avert 0·001 more DALYs. Relative to group medical visits, GMV-MF was estimated to cost $29 more and avert 0·009 more DALYs ($3235 per DALY averted). Relative to usual care, GMV-MF was estimated to cost $37 more and avert 0·014 more DALYs ($2601 per DALY averted). In the first year of the intervention, usual care was estimated to be the least expensive intervention to implement ($87 per participant; $10 238 per health-facility catchment area [HFCA]), then group medical visits ($99 per participant; $12 268 per HFCA), then microfinance ($120 per participant; $14 172 per HFCA), with GMV-MF estimated to be the most expensive intervention to implement ($139 per participant; $16 913 per HFCA).

Interpretation: Group medical visits and GMV-MF were estimated to be cost-effective strategies to improve blood-pressure control in rural Kenya. However, which intervention to pursue depends on resource availability. Policy makers should consider these factors, in addition to sex differences in programme effectiveness, when selecting optimal implementation strategies.

Funding: US National Institutes of Health.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肯尼亚管理高血压的团体医疗访问和小额信贷干预与常规护理的成本效益对比:对团体综合护理创收桥梁(BIGPIC)试验数据的二次建模分析。
背景:在肯尼亚农村地区开展的 "集体综合护理创收桥梁"(BIGPIC)试验表明,将常规护理与集体医疗访问或小额信贷干预相结合,可降低参与者的收缩压和心血管风险。我们的目的是估算 BIGPIC 三项干预措施在模拟人群中的增量成本效益(按性别分类),以及实施这些干预措施的成本:在这项分析中,我们使用了 BIGPIC 试验期间收集的数据,这是一项在肯尼亚西部 "提供医疗服务学术模式 "覆盖区进行的四组分组随机试验。BIGPIC 从肯尼亚西部农村地区的 24 家农村医疗机构招募了年龄在 35 岁或 35 岁以上、患有血压升高或糖尿病的参与者。参与者被分配接受常规护理、集体医疗访问、小额贷款或集体医疗访问和小额贷款的组合(GMV-MF)。我们的模型以 QRISK3 评分为基础,模拟假定的高血压患者群组的健康状态之间的转换,通过七种健康状态(即一种高血压状态、五种慢性心血管疾病状态和一种死亡状态)估算出三种 BIGPIC 干预措施的增量成本效益。在每个周期中,参与者都会累积与其健康状态相关的成本和残疾调整生命年(DALYs)。通过将增量成本除以下一个最昂贵干预措施的增量效果,计算出整个模拟队列和不同性别的增量成本效益比(ICER)。该分析的主要结果是所评估的每种干预措施的 ICER。该分析已在 ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02501746) 上注册:2017年2月6日至2019年12月29日期间,BIGPIC试验招募了2890人。2890名参与者中有2020人(69-9%)为女性,870人(30-1%)为男性。基线时,试验人群的平均 QRISK3 得分为 11-5(95% CI 11-1-11-9),男性参与者的平均 QRISK3 得分为 11-9(11-5-12-2),女性参与者的平均 QRISK3 得分为 11-3(11-0-11-6)。据估计,就肯尼亚人口而言,集体医疗访问比常规护理每人多花费 7 美元,并可多避免 0-005 个残疾调整寿命年(每避免一个残疾调整寿命年的 ICER 为 1455 美元)。据估计,小额信贷的成本比团体医疗访问高出 19 美元,但估计只能多避免 0-001 个残疾调整寿命年。与集体就诊相比,GMV-MF 的成本估计要高出 29 美元,但可避免的残疾调整寿命年数要多出 0-009 年(每避免 1 DALY 3235 美元)。与常规护理相比,GMV-MF 的成本估计要高出 37 美元,可多减少 0-014 人的残疾调整寿命年数(每减少 1 人的残疾调整寿命年数可减少 2601 美元)。据估计,在干预措施实施的第一年,常规护理是成本最低的干预措施(每位参与者 87 美元;每个卫生机构集聚区 [HFCA] 10 238 美元),然后是集体医疗访问(每位参与者 99 美元;每个卫生机构集聚区 12 268 美元),然后是小额信贷(每位参与者 120 美元;每个卫生机构集聚区 14 172 美元),据估计,GMV-MF 是成本最高的干预措施(每位参与者 139 美元;每个卫生机构集聚区 16 913 美元):据估计,在肯尼亚农村地区,集体医疗访问和 GMV-MF 是改善血压控制的具有成本效益的策略。然而,采取哪种干预措施取决于资源的可用性。决策者在选择最佳实施策略时,除了要考虑计划有效性的性别差异外,还应考虑这些因素:美国国立卫生研究院。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Lancet Global Health
Lancet Global Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
44.10
自引率
1.20%
发文量
763
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: The Lancet Global Health is an online publication that releases monthly open access (subscription-free) issues.Each issue includes original research, commentary, and correspondence.In addition to this, the publication also provides regular blog posts. The main focus of The Lancet Global Health is on disadvantaged populations, which can include both entire economic regions and marginalized groups within prosperous nations.The publication prefers to cover topics related to reproductive, maternal, neonatal, child, and adolescent health; infectious diseases (including neglected tropical diseases); non-communicable diseases; mental health; the global health workforce; health systems; surgery; and health policy.
期刊最新文献
Improving Ebola virus disease outbreak control through targeted post-exposure prophylaxis. Mechanisms and causes of death after abdominal surgery in low-income and middle-income countries: a secondary analysis of the FALCON trial. Microbiology testing capacity and antimicrobial drug resistance in surgical-site infections: a post-hoc, prospective, secondary analysis of the FALCON randomised trial in seven low-income and middle-income countries. Strengthening surgical systems in LMICs: data-driven approaches. Correction to Lancet Glob Health 2024; 12: e1278-87.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1