Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation最新文献

Access to convenient quality healthcare at all times is considered a basic human right; however, many countries are still striving to achieve this goal for their populations. The persistent rise in healthcare expenditure remains a significant obstacle in achieving universal health coverage on a global scale. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of financial inclusion in addressing the financial hardship related to health and medical expense concerns in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Probit models were applied to analyse nationally representative data from the Global Financial Inclusion (Global Findex) database. The results showed that financial inclusion had a significant impact on reducing the hardship associated with obtaining money for emergency expenses within 30 days as indicated by a significant coefficient of -0.262. Additionally, Financial inclusion substantially increases the likelihood of borrowing money for health or medical purposes in the past 12 months, with a coefficient of 0.585. Moreover, correlations were identified between low income levels and decreased likelihood of borrowing for health/medical purposes, increased difficulty in obtaining money for emergency expenses, and heightened concern regarding the ability to afford medical costs in the event of serious illness or accidents. These findings highlight the need for policy makers and health providers to prioritize financial inclusion and support programs for low-income individuals to achieve equity in health treatment for all in Saudi Arabia.

Background: Maternal and neonatal mortality in low- and middle-income countries is frequently caused by inadequate management of obstetric and neonatal complications and a shortage of skilled health workers. The availability of these workers is essential for effective and high-quality healthcare. To meet the needs of sexual, reproductive, maternal, new-born, child, and adolescent health by 2030, more than one million health workers, including 900 000 midwives, are required globally. Despite this, uncertainty persists regarding the return on investment in the health workforce.

Methods: The objective of this research was to determine the cost-benefit ratio of increasing investment in midwifery in Morocco from 2021 to 2030. A comparative analysis was conducted between scenarios "with" and "without" the additional investment. The costs and benefits were estimated using relevant data from national and international sources.

Results: Following the International Confederation of Midwives' recommendations, it is advised that Morocco recruit 760 midwives annually to achieve 95% of universal health coverage. This increase in midwifery could result in saving 120 593 lives by 2030, including reducing maternal deaths by 3 201, stillbirths by 48 399, and neonatal deaths by 68 993. The estimated economic benefit of investing in midwives was US$ 10 152 287 749, while the total cost was US$ 638 288 820. Consequently, the cost-benefit ratio was calculated as 15.91, indicating that investing in midwifery would provide 16 times more benefits than costs.

Conclusion: Increasing investment in midwifery appears to be an efficient strategy for achieving comprehensive maternal and child health coverage in low- and middle-income countries.

Background: The value of a life is regularly monetised by government departments for informing resource allocation. Guidance documents indicate how economic evaluation should be conducted, often specifying precise values for different impacts. However, we find different values of life and health are used in analyses by departments within the same government despite commonality in desired outcomes. This creates potential inconsistencies in considering trade-offs within a broader public sector spending budget. We provide evidence to better inform the political process and to raise important issues in assessing the value of public expenditure across different sectors.

Methods: Our document analysis identifies thresholds, explicitly or implicitly, as observed in government-related publications in the following public sectors: health, social care, transport, and environment. We include both demand-side and supply-side thresholds, understood as societies' and governments' willingness to pay for health gains. We look at key countries that introduced formal economic evaluation processes early on and have impacted other countries' policy development: Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. We also present a framework to consider how governments allocate resources across different public services.

Results: Our analysis supports that identifying and describing the Value of a Life from disparate public sector activities in a manner that facilitates comparison is theoretically meaningful. The optimal allocation of resources across sectors depends on the relative position of benefits across different attributes, weighted by the social value that society puts on them. The value of a Quality-Adjusted Life Year is generally used as a demand-side threshold by Departments of transport and environment. It exceeds those used in health, often by a large enough proportion to be a multiple thereof. Decisions made across departments are generally based on an unspecified rationing rule.

Conclusions: Comparing government expenditure across different public sector departments, in terms of the value of each department outcome, is not only possible but also desirable. It is essential for an optimal resource allocation to identify the relevant social attributes and to quantify the value of these attributes for each department.

Background: Psoriasis, an immune-mediated chronic inflammatory disease primarily affecting skin and joints, has varying prevalence rates globally. It manifests in five types, with chronic plaque psoriasis being the most common. Treatment, which has no definitive cure, aims for complete resolution of skin symptoms and depends on disease extent, severity, and impact on patients' lives. Biologics are an emerging treatment for psoriasis, targeting specific inflammatory pathways for potentially safer, more effective outcomes. However, these come with significant costs, necessitating more research to ensure value for money. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of Risankizumab versus Adalimumab, the most commonly utilized biologic for managing psoriasis in Saudi Arabia.

Methods: This study retrospectively compared the effectiveness and direct medical cost of Risankizumab and Adalimumab in treating chronic plaque psoriasis in adults from two Saudi Arabian healthcare centers. The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and body surface area (BSA) were used to assess treatment effectiveness, with patient data sourced from electronic medical records. Multiple regression analysis was performed to examine various factors affecting treatment outcomes. An economic evaluation was conducted to examine the cost-effectiveness of the two drugs, considering four scenarios with varying dosage patterns and costs. Analysis was performed from the perspective of public healthcare payers and considered all utilized health services.

Results: The data for 70 patients were analyzed, with comparable baseline characteristics between groups. While Risankizumab led to a greater reduction in PASI scores and BSA affected, these results were not statistically significant. The annual treatment cost for Risankizumab was higher than Adalimumab. Various scenarios were studied, considering real acquisition costs, double dosing for Adalimumab, and the use of biosimilars. A scenario assuming double dosing for Adalimumab and a 40% discount for Risankizumab demonstrated both cost and efficacy advantages in 71.25% of cases.

Conclusions: This study compared the effectiveness and cost of Risankizumab and Adalimumab for treating chronic plaque psoriasis in Saudi Arabian hospitals. Although Risankizumab showed a greater reduction in symptoms, the difference was not statistically significant. However, under certain scenarios, Risankizumab demonstrated cost and efficacy advantages. These findings may influence treatment decisions for psoriasis, but further research is needed.

Background: Although the treatment for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) under Nigeria's National Health Insurance Authority is haemodialysis (HD), the cost of managing ESRD is understudied in Nigeria. Therefore, this study estimated the provider and patient direct costs of haemodialysis and managing ESRD in Abuja, Nigeria.

Method: The study was a cross-sectional survey from both healthcare provider and consumer perspectives. We collected data from public and private tertiary hospitals (n = 6) and ESRD patients (n = 230) receiving haemodialysis in the selected hospitals. We estimated the direct providers' costs using fixed and variable costs. Patients' direct costs included drugs, laboratory services, transportation, feeding, and comorbidities. Additionally, data on the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients were collected. The costs were summarized in descriptive statistics using means and percentages. A generalized linear model (gamma with log link) was used to predict the patient characteristics associated with patients' cost of haemodialysis.

Results: The mean direct cost of haemodialysis was $152.20 per session (providers: $123.69; and patients: $28.51) and $23,742.96 annually (providers: $19,295.64; and patients: $4,447.32). Additionally, patients spent an average of $2,968.23 managing comorbidities. The drivers of providers' haemodialysis costs were personnel and supplies. Residing in other towns (HD:β = 0.55, ρ = 0.001; ESRD:β = 0.59, ρ = 0.004), lacking health insurance (HD:β = 0.24, ρ = 0.038), attending private health facility (HD:β = 0.46, ρ < 0.001; ESRD: β = 0.75, ρ < 0.001), and greater than six haemodialysis sessions per month (HD:β = 0.79, ρ < 0.001; ESRD: β = 0.99, ρ < 0.001) significantly increased the patient's out-of-pocket spending on haemodialysis and ESRD.

Conclusion: The costs of haemodialysis and managing ESRD patients are high. Providing public subsidies for dialysis and expanding social health insurance coverage for ESRD patients might reduce the costs.

Background: According to the Chinese guidelines for lipid management (2023), evolocumab in combination with statins was recommended as secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. However, because of the variation in the price of evolocumab and its different methods of confirming clinical efficacy, it was necessary to explore its economics and the impact of different methods of confirming efficacy on its economic studies.

Objective: The purpose of this paper was to assess the cost-effectiveness of evolocumab with statins versus statins alone for patients with acute myocardial infarction(AMI) in China and to investigate the impact of different clinical effectiveness modeling approaches on economic outcomes.

Methods: A Markov cohort state-transition model was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) based on Chinese observational data on cardiovascular event rates, efficacy from the Asian subgroup of the FOURIER trial, cost and utility from the Chinese Yearbook of Health Statistics, health insurance data, and published studies conducted in China. This study conducted subgroup analyses for different populations and dosing regimens; sensitivity analyses for parameters such as cost, utility, and cardiovascular event rates; and scenario analyses on hospital hierarchy, time horizon, starting age, and price for statins.

Results: ICERs ranged from 27423 to 214777 Chinese yuan(CNY) per QALY gained, all below the willingness-to-pay threshold of CNY 257094. Only when the time horizon became small, the ICERs were greater than the willingness-to-pay. The probabilities that adding evolocumab to statins was cost-effective ranged from 76 to 98%. When the time horizon became small, i.e. evolocumab was discontinued before the age of 75 (after conversion), the corresponding ICERs were almost always greater than the willingness-to-pay. ICERs for modelling approaches based on clinical endpoints were 1.34 to 1.95 times higher than ICERs for modelling approaches based on reduced LDL-C levels.

Conclusions: From the Chinese healthcare and private payer perspectives, adding evolocumab to statin therapy in AMI patients is more likely to be a cost-effective treatment option at the current list price of CNY 283.8. However, evolocumab may not be cost-effective if used for shorter periods of time. The results based on different clinical effectiveness modeling approaches were significantly different.

Background: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is an aggressive and therapy-resistant form of breast cancer with a significant economic burden on patients and healthcare systems. Therefore, we completed a systematic review to classify and synthesize the literature on the direct and indirect costs of TNBC.

Methods: Databases including ISI Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar were searched for all related articles assessing the economic burden of TNBC from 2010 until December 2022. The quality and eligibility assessments were done accordingly. We adjusted all costs to January 2023 $US.

Results: From 881 records, 15 studies were eligible. We found that studies are widely disparate in the timetable, study design, patient populations, and cost components assessed. The annual per-patient direct costs of metastatic TNBC (mTNBC) were about $24,288 to $316,800. For early TNCB patients (eTNBC) this was about $21,120 to $105,600. Cancer management anticancer therapy costs account for the majority of direct costs. Along with an increase in cancer stage and line of therapy, healthcare costs were increased. Moreover, the indirect costs of patients with mTNBC and eTNBC were about $1060.875 and about $186,535 for each patient respectively.

Conclusion: The results showed that the direct and indirect costs of TNBC, mainly those of mTNBC, were substantial, suggesting attention to medical progress in cancer prognosis and therapy approaches.

Objective: The aim of this article is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ABE + ET) vs. ET as adjuvant treatment for high-risk hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) early breast cancer in China.

Methods: From the perspective of the Chinese health care system, a 5-state Markov model was developed with a lifetime horizon. Data of the monarchE phase III clinical trial were used to model the invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) and standard parameters models were used for data extrapolation. Costs were obtained from national data sources, expert opinions and published literature using 2023 US dollars and discounted by 5%. The results were evaluated in terms of life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses were performed to test the robustness of the basic results.

Results: In the base-case analysis result, the model projected improved outcomes (by 0.65 LYs and 0.72 QALYs) and increased costs (by $16,057.72) for incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of $24,841/LY and $22,385/QALY for ABE + ET vs. ET patients. The results in scenario analysis estimated the ICERs of ABE + ET treatment to be $16,959/LY and $15,264/QALY in a mixture cure model, and $13,560/LY and $12,191/QALY in a non-mixture cure model. The model was sensitive to outcome discount rate and utility of iDFS.

Conclusion: ABE + ET might not have an economic advantage over ET at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of one time the per capita GDP in China, but was expected to be more cost-effective at a WTP threshold of three times the per capita GDP. Further analysis will be conducted once data from longer-term studies become available.

Introduction: This study investigates Iranian men's willingness to pay (WTP) for prostate cancer (PCa) screening and influencing factor, along with the impact of information.

Method: We assessed preferences for prostate cancer screening in 771 Iranian men aged 40 and above using an internet-based questionnaire survey. Participants received basic and complementary information, and their willingness to pay was determined through a payment card approach. A Wilcoxon test assessed the impact of information. We also analyzed prostate cancer screening demand and employed Heckman's two-step model to evaluate factors influencing the willingness to pay. Additionally, reasons for unwillingness to pay were explored.

Results: Willingness to pay significantly decreased with complementary information relative to basic information (16.3$ vs 17.8$). Heckman model, using WTP based on basic information shows age, education, and monthly household expenditure positively influenced the decision to pay. In contrast, health status, expectations of remaining life and prostate problems history positively affect amount of WTP for PCa screening, and insurance coverage has a negative impact on it. Majority of respondents (91%) supported PCa screening, with 82% expressing a willingness to pay. Common reasons for not paying include seeing screening as a public good (43%), financial constraints (35%), and having insurance (20%). The screening demand is price-sensitive.

Conclusion: The basic mindset of Iranian men exaggerates the risk of prostate cancer. Reduced willingness to pay after receiving information reassures the reliability of their financial expectation. Taking into account the factors that influence PCa screening is essential for accurate planning and the successful implementation of this program.

Background: Demonstrating safety and efficacy of new medical treatments requires clinical trials but clinical trials are costly and may not provide value proportionate to their costs. As most health systems have limited resources, it is therefore important to identify the trials with the highest value. Tools exist to assess elements of a clinical trial such as statistical validity but are not wholistic in their valuation of a clinical trial. This study aims to develop a measure of clinical trials value and provide an online tool for clinical trial prioritisation.

Methods: A search of the academic and grey literature and stakeholder consultation was undertaken to identify a set of criteria to aid clinical trial valuation using multi-criteria decision analysis. Swing weighting and ranking exercises were used to calculate appropriate weights of each of the included criteria and to estimate the partial-value function for each underlying metric. The set of criteria and their respective weights were applied to the results of six different clinical trials to calculate their value.

Results: Seven criteria were identified: 'unmet need', 'size of target population', 'eligible participants can access the trial', 'patient outcomes', 'total trial cost', 'academic impact' and 'use of trial results'. The survey had 80 complete sets of responses (51% response rate). A trial designed to address an 'Unmet Need' was most commonly ranked as the most important with a weight of 24.4%, followed by trials demonstrating improved 'Patient Outcomes' with a weight of 21.2%. The value calculated for each trial allowed for their clear delineation and thus a final value ranking for each of the six trials.

Conclusion: We confirmed that the use of the decision tool for valuing clinical trials is feasible and that the results are face valid based on the evaluation of six trials. A proof-of-concept applying this tool to a larger set of trials with an external validation is currently underway.