Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation最新文献

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.

Objective: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of using Implant Movement Analysis (IMA) to follow up suspected aseptic loosening when the diagnosis after an initial X-ray is not conclusive, compared with a diagnostic pathway with X-ray follow-up.

Methods: A health-economic model in the form of a decision tree was developed using quality-adjusted life years (QALY) from the literature, cost-per-patient data from a university hospital and the probabilities of different events from expert physicians' opinions. The base case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was compared with established willingness-to-pay thresholds and sensitivity analyses were performed to account for assumptions and uncertainty.

Results: The base case ICER indicated that the IMA pathway was cost effective (SEK 99,681, compared with the SEK 500,000 threshold). In the sensitivity analysis, the IMA pathway remained cost effective during most changes in parameters. ICERs above the threshold value occurred in cases where a larger or smaller proportion of people receive immediate surgery.

Conclusion: A diagnostic pathway using IMA after an inconclusive X-ray for suspected aseptic loosening was cost effective compared with a pathway with X-ray follow-up.

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.

Background: Breast cancer represents the most prevalent cancer among Swedish women. Although considerable research has investigated the cost-effectiveness of emerging innovative medical treatments for breast cancer, studies addressing existing surgical procedures remain scant. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of three surgical procedures for in situ breast cancer treatment in Sweden: mastectomy, lumpectomy without irradiation, and lumpectomy with irradiation.

Methods: A six-state Markov model with a 30-year time horizon was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of the three alternatives. Transition probabilities were based on a targeted literature review focusing on available evidence in Sweden and comparable contexts. Costs were estimated from both healthcare and societal perspectives, using patient data from the Swedish National Cancer Registry in 2020 (Cancerregistret). Health outcomes were quantified in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Cost and health outcomes were then summarised into an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between competing strategies. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was conducted to address the uncertainties in the input parameters.

Results: The results showed that compared to lumpectomy without irradiation, lumpectomy with irradiation yielded a "moderate" ICER per QALY gained of 402,994 Swedish Krona (SEK) from a healthcare perspective and a "high" ICER of 575,833 SEK from a societal perspective. Mastectomy proved to be the costliest and least effective of the three alternatives over a 30-year period. The PSA results further substantiated these findings.

Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that lumpectomy with irradiation is "moderately" cost-effective compared with lumpectomy without irradiation. Nevertheless, extending this study by conducting a comprehensive budget impact analysis to account for the prevalence of in situ breast cancer in Sweden is prudent. These results imply that a costlier and less effective mastectomy should only be considered when lumpectomy options are infeasible. Further studies are needed to obtain more reliable parameters relevant to Sweden and to increase the consistency of the findings.

Background: Management of COVID-19 patients with mild and moderate symptoms could be isolated at home isolation (HI), community isolation (CI) or hospitel. However, it was still unclear which strategy was more cost-effective. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate this.

Methods: This study used data from patients who initially stayed at HI, CI, and hospitel under supervision of Ramathibodi Hospital between April and October 2021. Outcomes of interest were hospitalisation and mortality. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) was calculated based on hospital perspective using home isolation as the reference.

Results: From 7,077 patients, 4,349 2,356, and 372 were admitted at hospitel, HI, and CI, respectively. Most patients were females (57.04%) and the mean age was 40.42 (SD = 16.15). Average durations of stay were 4.47, 3.35, and 3.91 days for HI, CI, and hospitel, respectively. The average cost per day for staying in these corresponding places were 24.22, 63.69, and 65.23 US$. For hospitalisation, the ICER for hospitel was at 41.93 US$ to avoid one hospitalisation in 1,000 patients when compared to HI, while CI had more cost, but less cases avoided. The ICER for hospitel and CI were at 46.21 and 866.17 US$ to avoid one death in 1,000 patients.

Conclusions: HI may be cost-effective isolated strategy for preventing hospitalisation and death in developing countries with limited resources.

Introduction: Artificial Intelligence (AI) represents a significant advancement in technology, and it is crucial for policymakers to incorporate AI thinking into policies and to fully explore, analyze and utilize massive data and conduct AI-related policies. AI has the potential to optimize healthcare financing systems. This study provides an overview of the AI application domains in healthcare financing.

Method: We conducted a scoping review in six steps: formulating research questions, identifying relevant studies by conducting a comprehensive literature search using appropriate keywords, screening titles and abstracts for relevance, reviewing full texts of relevant articles, charting extracted data, and compiling and summarizing findings. Specifically, the research question sought to identify the applications of artificial intelligence in health financing supported by the published literature and explore potential future applications. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched between 2000 and 2023.

Results: We discovered that AI has a significant impact on various aspects of health financing, such as governance, revenue raising, pooling, and strategic purchasing. We provide evidence-based recommendations for establishing and improving the health financing system based on AI.

Conclusions: To ensure that vulnerable groups face minimum challenges and benefit from improved health financing, we urge national and international institutions worldwide to use and adopt AI tools and applications.

Background: In recent years, numerous guidelines and expert consensus have recommended the inclusion of digital technologies and products in cardiac rehabilitation. Digital therapeutics (DTx) is an evidence-based medicine that uses digital means for data collection and monitoring of indicators to control and optimize the treatment, management, and prevention of disease.

Objective: This study collected and reviewed real-world data and built a model using health economics assessment methods to analyze the potential cost-effectiveness of DTx applied to home-based cardiac rehabilitation for patients with chronic heart failure. From the perspective of medical and health decision-makers, the economic value of DTx is evaluated prospectively to provide the basis and reference for the application decision and promotion of DTx.

Methods: Markov models were constructed to simulate the outcomes of DTx for home-based cardiac rehabilitation (DT group) compared to conventional home-based cardiac rehabilitation (CH group) in patients with chronic heart failure. The model input parameters were clinical indicators and cost data. Outcome indicators were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). The robustness of the evaluation methods and results was tested using sensitivity analyses. Clinical indicators, cost data, and health utility values were obtained from real-world data, including clinical study data, published literature, and public website information.

Results: The Markov model simulated a time span of 10 years, with a cycle set at one month, for 120 cycles. The results showed that the per capita cost of the CH group was 38,442.11 CNY/year, with a QALY of 0.7196 per person per year. The per capita cost of the DT group was 42,300.26 CNY/year, with a QALY of 0.81687 per person per year. The ICER per person was 39,663.5 CNY/QALY each year, which was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of 85,698 CNY (China's GDP per capita in 2022).

Conclusions: DTx for home-based cardiac rehabilitation is an extremely cost-effective rehabilitation option compared with conventional home-based cardiac rehabilitation. DTx for home-based cardiac rehabilitation is potentially valuable from the perspective of healthcare decision-makers.

Background: Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer in males worldwide and the third most common among Iran's male population. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding its direct and indirect costs in low and middle-income countries. This study intends to bridge the gap using a cost of illness approach, assessing the costs of prostate cancer from the perspectives of patients, society, and the insurance system.

Methods: Two hundred ninety seven patients were included in the study. Data for a 2-month period were obtained from patients registered at two hospitals (Tabriz, Tehran) in Iran in 2017. We applied a prevalence-based, bottom-up approach to assess the costs of the illness. We used the World Health Organization methods to measure the prevalence and investigate the determinants of catastrophic and impoverishing health expenditures.

Results: We determined the total costs of the disease for the patients to be IRR 68 million (PPP $ 5,244.44). Total costs of the disease from the perspective of the society amounted to IRR 700,000 million (PPP $ 54 million). Insurance companies expended IRR 20 million (PPP $ 1,558.80) per patient. Our findings show that 31% of the patients incurred catastrophic health expenditure due to the disease. Five point forty-four percent (5.44%) of the patients were impoverished due to the costs of this cancer.

Conclusion: We found an alarmingly high prevalence of catastrophic health expenditures among prostate cancer patients. In addition, prostate cancer puts a substantial burden on both the patients and society.

Background: Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) patients often require long-term care, and while Hemodialysis (HD) is the standard treatment, Comprehensive Conservative Care (CCC) is gaining popularity as an alternative. Economic evaluations comparing their cost-effectiveness are crucial. This study aims to perform a cost-utility analysis comparing HD and CCC using the EQ-5D-5L and ICECAP-O instruments to assessing healthcare interventions in CKD patients.

Methods: This short-term economic evaluation involved 183 participants (105 HD, 76 CCC) and collected data on demographics, comorbidities, laboratory results, treatment costs, and HRQoL measured by ICECAP-O and EQ-5D-5L. Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) and Net Monetary Benefit (NMB) were calculated separately for each instrument, and Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis (PSA) assessed uncertainty.

Results: CCC demonstrated significantly lower costs (mean difference $8,544.52) compared to HD. Both EQ-5D-5L and ICECAP-O indicated higher Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) for both groups, but the difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). CCC dominated HD in terms of HRQoL measures, with ICERs of -$141,742.67 (EQ-5D-5L) and -$4,272.26 (ICECAP-O). NMB was positive for CCC and negative for HD, highlighting its economic feasibility.

Conclusion: CCC proves a preferable and more cost-effective treatment option than HD for CKD patients aged 65 and above, regardless of the quality-of-life measure used for QALY calculations. Both EQ-5D-5L and ICECAP-O showed similar results in cost-utility analysis.

Objectives: Monetizing health has sparked controversy and has implications for pricing strategies of emerging health technologies. Medical insurance payers typically set up thresholds for quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gains based on health productivity and budget affordability, but they rarely consider patient willingness-to-pay (WTP). Our study aims to compare Chinese payer threshold and patient WTP toward QALY gain of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to inform a potential inclusion of patient WTP under more complex decision-making scenarios.

Methods: A regression model was constructed with cost as the independent variable and QALY as the dependent variable, where the regression coefficients reflect mean opportunity cost, and by transforming these coefficients, the payer threshold can be obtained. Patient WTP was elicited through a contingent valuation method survey. The robustness of the findings was examined through sensitivity analyses of model parameters and patient heterogeneity.

Results: The payer mean threshold in the base-case was estimated at 150,962 yuan (1.86 times per capita GDP, 95% CI 144,041-159,204). The two scenarios analysis generated by different utility inputs yielded thresholds of 112,324 yuan (1.39 times per capita GDP) and 111,824 yuan (1.38 times per capita GDP), respectively. The survey included 85 patients, with a mean WTP of 148,443 yuan (1.83 times per capita GDP, 95% CI 120,994-175,893) and median value was 106,667 yuan (1.32 times the GDP per capita). Due to the substantial degree of dispersion, the median was more representative. The payer threshold was found to have a high probability (98.5%) of falling within the range of 1-2 times per capita GDP, while the robustness of patient WTP was relatively weak.

Conclusions: In China, a country with a copayment system, payer threshold was higher than patient WTP, indicating that medical insurance holds significant decision-making authority, thus temporarily negating the need to consider patient WTP.