Applied Health Economics and Health Policy最新文献

Background and Objective

Androgen-deprivation therapy is the mainstay of treatment for patients with newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). However, the intensification of treatment with either docetaxel or novel anti-androgens (abiraterone-acetate plus prednisone [AAP], enzalutamide, and apalutamide) is being recommended based on the improved clinical outcomes and quality of life among patients. This study aimed to determine the most cost-effective drug for treatment intensification for patients with mHSPC in India.

Methods

A Markov model was developed with four health states: progression-free survival, progressive disease, best supportive care, and death. Lifetime costs and consequences were estimated for four treatment sequences: AAP-first, enzalutamide-first, apalutamide-first, and docetaxel-first. Incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained with a given treatment option was compared against the next best alternative and assessed for cost effectiveness using a willingness to pay threshold of 1 × per capita gross domestic product in India.

Results

We estimated that the total lifetime cost per patient was ₹1,367,454 (US$17,487), ₹2,168,885 (US$27,735), ₹7,678,501 (US$98,190), and ₹1,358,746 (US$17,375) in the AAP-first, enzalutamide-first, apalutamide-first, and docetaxel-first treatment sequence, respectively. The mean quality-adjusted life-years lived per patient were 4.78, 5.03, 3.22, and 2.61, respectively. The AAP-first sequence incurs an incremental cost of ₹4014 (US$51) per quality-adjusted life-year gained as compared with the docetaxel-first sequence, with a 87% probability of being cost effective at the willingness-to-pay threshold of 1 × per-capita gross domestic product of India. The use of AAP-first also incurs an incremental net monetary benefit of ₹396,491 (US$5070) as compared with the docetaxel-first treatment sequence. Nearly a 48% reduction in the price of enzalutamide is required to make it a cost-effective treatment sequence as compared with AAP-first in India.

Conclusions

We concur with the inclusion of standard-dose AAP in India’s publicly financed health insurance scheme for the intensification of treatment in mHSPC as it is the only cost-effective sequence among the various novel anti-androgens when compared with the docetaxel-first treatment sequence. Furthermore, a systematic reduction in the price of enzalutamide would further help to improve clinical outcomes among patients with mHSPC.

Background

Providing informal care has a negative effect on the caregiver’s health and well-being, but little is known about how individuals respond to receiving informal care. Care recipients may improve their health behaviours to minimise the onerousness of caregiving and the stress faced by their carer from seeing a loved one in ill-health.

Objective

We aimed to examine whether informal care recipients internalise the potential for carer spillovers through changes in health behaviours.

Methods

We used data from 3250 older adults with care needs who took part in the UK Household Longitudinal Study between 2017 and 2019. We examined the response to informal care receipt in terms of the probability of engaging in four health behaviours: healthy diet, physical activity, smoking and alcohol consumption. We estimated average treatment effects using regression adjustment with inverse probability treatment weights, comparing individuals that received informal care to those receiving either formal or no care.

Results

We found that informal care receipt increased the probability of refraining from negative health behaviours (smoking and alcohol consumption) but reduced the probability of engaging in positive health behaviours (eating fruits and/or vegetables and physical activity).

Conclusions

The asymmetric effects detected suggest that the underlying mechanisms are different, and care recipients may be engaging in risk and effort compensation between negative and positive health behaviours. Failure to account for the behavioural responses from informal care recipients may lead to under-estimation or over-estimation of the extent of caregiving burden and the effectiveness of interventions impacting informal carers.

Community-based health promotion (CBHP) interventions are promising approaches to address public health problems; however, their economic evaluation presents unique challenges. This review aims to explore the opportunities and limitations of evaluating economic aspects of CBHP, focusing on the assessment of intervention costs and outcomes, and the consideration of political-level changes and health equity. A systematic search of the PubMed, Web of Science and PsycInfo databases identified 24 CBHP interventions, the majority of which targeted disadvantaged communities. Only five interventions included a detailed cost/resource assessment. Outcomes at the operational level were mainly quantitative, related to sociodemographics and environment or health status, while outcomes at the political level were often qualitative, related to public policy, capacity building or networks/collaboration. The study highlights the limitations of traditional health economic evaluation methods in capturing the complexity of CBHP interventions. It proposes the use of cost-consequence analysis (CCA) as a more comprehensive approach, offering a flexible and multifaceted assessment of costs and outcomes. However, challenges remain in the measurement and valuation of outcomes, equity considerations, intersectoral costs and attribution of effects. While CCA is a promising starting point, further research and methodological advancements are needed to refine its application and improve decision making in CBHP.

Conflicts over pharmaceutical pricing are driven by the patients’ need for affordable medicines and the producer’s reward for the investments in developing innovative medicines. A single price cannot achieve both goals, as it will either obstruct access by patients or provide too low a return to investors. This has led to calls to “delink” the payment for innovation from the price paid for drugs, so that both goals can be met efficiently and without conflict. However, the details of how best to do that are unclear. This paper proposes a specific implementation for delinking the Optional Delinked Reward System (ODRS), which integrates ideas from numerous pharmaceutical reimbursement systems. The ODRS would allow firms to choose either to negotiate a sales price for a drug (as is the current practice in most countries) or to sell their drug at a low “generic” price with a supplementary “delinked” reward based on assessed health benefit. This model builds on recent innovations in drug reimbursement including the UK’s Antibiotic Subscription Pilot and the Pneumococcal Vaccine Advanced Market Commitment. The ODRS would ensure affordable and immediate access for patients and a fair reward for innovators.

Background

Depression in adolescents and young adults is common and causes considerable disease burden while hampering their development, leading to adverse consequences in later life. Although treatment is available, young people are a vulnerable group regarding uptake and completion of treatment. To improve this, insight into youth’s preferences for treatment is essential.

Objective

The aim of this study was to investigate patient preferences for depression treatment in a Dutch sample aged 16–24 years using a discrete choice experiment (DCE).

Methods

The study was conducted in The Netherlands between October 2018 and June 2019, and included 236 adolescents and young adults with current depressive symptoms or previous treatment. The DCE included five attributes (treatment type, frequency of appointment, waiting time, effectiveness, evaluation of therapeutic alliance) with corresponding levels. Results were analysed using latent class analysis.

Results

Results show a general preference for individual psychotherapy, treatment with high frequency, high effectiveness, short waiting time and a standard evaluation of the therapeutic alliance (‘click’ with the therapist) early in treatment. Latent class analysis revealed three different patterns of preferences regarding treatment type and willingness to engage in therapy. The first class showed a strong preference for individual therapy. The second class, including relatively older, higher educated and treatment-experienced participants, preferred high frequency treatment and was more open to different forms of therapy. The third class, including lower educated, younger and treatment-naïve adolescents showed reluctance to engage in therapy overall and in group therapy specifically.

Conclusion

In this DCE, three classes could be identified that share similar preferences regarding treatment effectiveness, waiting time and evaluation of the therapeutic alliance, but varied considerably in their preference for treatment type (individual, group, or combined psychotherapy) and their willingness to engage. The results from this study may inform mental health care providers and institutions and help optimize professional care for adolescents and young adults with depressive symptoms, improving engagement in this vulnerable group.

Participatory value evaluation (PVE) has recently been introduced in the field of health as a new method to elicit stated preferences for public policies. PVE is a method in which respondents in a choice experiment are presented with various policy options and their attributes, and are asked to compose their portfolio of preference given a public-resource constraint. This paper aims to illustrate PVE’s potential for informing healthcare decision making and to position it relative to established preference-elicitation methods. We first describe PVE and its theoretical background. Next, by means of a narrative review of the eight existing PVE applications within and outside the health domain, we illustrate the different implementations of the main features of the method. We then compare PVE to several established preference-elicitation methods in terms of the structure and nature of the choice tasks presented to respondents. The portfolio-based choice task in a PVE requires respondents to consider a set of policy alternatives in relation to each other and to make trade-offs subject to one or more constraints, which more closely resembles decision making by policymakers. When using a flexible budget constraint, respondents can trade-off their private income with public expenditures. Relative to other methods, a PVE may be cognitively more demanding and is less efficient; however, it seems a promising complementary method for the preference-based assessment of health policies. Further research into the feasibility and validity of the method is required before researchers and policymakers can fully appreciate the advantages and disadvantages of the PVE as a preference-elicitation method.