scholarly journals PRM59 Estimating the Confidence Interval for the Cost-Effectiveness Ratio from A Family of Regressions on Net Monetary Benefit

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. A431
Author(s):  
D.D. Gagnon
2019 ◽  
Vol 70 (12) ◽  
pp. 2461-2468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole M White ◽  
Adrian G Barnett ◽  
Lisa Hall ◽  
Brett G Mitchell ◽  
Alison Farrington ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) remain a significant patient safety issue, with point prevalence estimates being ~5% in high-income countries. In 2016–2017, the Researching Effective Approaches to Cleaning in Hospitals (REACH) study implemented an environmental cleaning bundle targeting communication, staff training, improved cleaning technique, product use, and audit of frequent touch-point cleaning. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of the environmental cleaning bundle for reducing the incidence of HAIs. Methods A stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial was conducted in 11 hospitals recruited from 6 Australian states and territories. Bundle effectiveness was measured by the numbers of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia, Clostridium difficile infection, and vancomycin-resistant enterococci infections prevented in the intervention phase based on estimated reductions in the relative risk of infection. Changes to costs were defined as the cost of implementing the bundle minus cost savings from fewer infections. Health benefits gained from fewer infections were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and net monetary benefit of adopting the cleaning bundle over existing hospital cleaning practices. Results Implementing the cleaning bundle cost $349 000 Australian dollars (AUD) and generated AUD$147 500 in cost savings. Infections prevented under the cleaning bundle returned a net monetary benefit of AUD$1.02 million and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $4684 per QALY gained. There was an 86% chance that the bundle was cost-effective compared with existing hospital cleaning practices. Conclusions A bundled, evidence-based approach to improving hospital cleaning is a cost-effective intervention for reducing the incidence of HAIs.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. e048141
Author(s):  
Sara Mucherino ◽  
Valentina Lorenzoni ◽  
Valentina Orlando ◽  
Isotta Triulzi ◽  
Marzia Del Re ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe combination of biomarkers and drugs is the subject of growing interest both from regulators, physicians and companies. This study protocol of a systematic review is aimed to describe available literature evidences about the cost-effectiveness, cost-utility or net-monetary benefit of the use of biomarkers in solid tumour as tools for customising immunotherapy to identify what further research needs.Methods and analysisA systematic review of the literature will be carried out according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement guidelines. PubMed and Embase will be queried from June 2010 to June 2021. The PICOS model will be applied: target population (P) will be patients with solid tumours treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); the interventions (I) will be test of the immune checkpoint predictive biomarkers; the comparator (C) will be any other targeted or non-targeted therapy; outcomes (O) evaluated will be health economic and clinical implications assessed in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, net health benefit, net monetary benefit, life years gained, quality of life, etc; study (S) considered will be economic evaluations reporting cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-utility analysis, net-monetary benefit. The quality of the evidence will be graded according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review will assess the cost-effectiveness implications of using biomarkers in the immunotherapy with ICIs, which may help to understand whether this approach is widespread in real clinical practice. This research is exempt from ethics approval because the work is carried out on published documents. We will disseminate this protocol in a related peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020201549.


Author(s):  
N. Faccioli ◽  
E. Santi ◽  
G. Foti ◽  
G. Mansueto ◽  
M. Corain

Abstract Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of introducing cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the management of the complex finger fractures with articular involvement. Methods We created a decision tree model simulating the diagnostic pathway of complex finger fractures, suggesting the use of CBCT as alternative to multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT), and we compared their clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness for a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients. Measures of effectiveness are analysed by using quality-adjusted life years, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and net monetary benefit. Results Diagnosis of a complex finger fracture performed with CBCT costed 67.33€ per patient, yielded 9.08 quality-adjusted life years, and gained an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 29.94€ and a net monetary benefit of 9.07 € at 30,000€ threshold. Using MSCT for diagnosis costed 106.23 €, yielded 8.18 quality-adjusted life years, and gained an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 371.15 € and a net monetary benefit of 8.09 €. CBCT strategy dominated the MSCT strategy. The acceptability curve shows that there is 98% probability of CBCT being the optimal strategy at 30,000€ threshold (1 EUR equal to 1.11 USD; updated on 02/02/2020). Conclusion CBCT in complex finger fractures management is cost saving compared with MSCT and may be considered a valuable imaging tool in preoperative assessment, allowing early detection and appropriate treatment. It shortens the time to completion of diagnostic work-up, reduces the number of additional diagnostic procedures, improves quality of life, and may reduce costs in a societal perspective.


2020 ◽  
pp. 2002436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ciaran O'Neill ◽  
Peter G Gibson ◽  
Liam G Heaney ◽  
John W Upham ◽  
Ian A Yang ◽  
...  

Add-on azithromycin (AZM) results in a significant reduction in exacerbations among adults with persistent uncontrolled asthma. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of add-on AZM in terms of healthcare and societal costs.The AMAZES trial randomly assigned 420 participants to AZM or placebo. Healthcare use and asthma exacerbations were measured during the treatment period. Healthcare use included all prescribed medicine and healthcare contacts. Costs of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) were estimated based on overall consumption and published estimates of costs. The value of an avoided exacerbation was based on published references. Differences in cost between the two groups were related to differences in exacerbations in a series of net monetary benefit estimates. Societal costs included lost productivity, over the counter medicines, steroid induced morbidity and AMR costs.Add-on AZM resulted in a reduction in healthcare costs (mean (95% CI)) including nights in hospital (AUD$433.70 ($48.59–$818.81) or €260.22(€29.15–€491.29)), unplanned healthcare visits (AUD$20.25 ($5.23–$35.27) or €12.15 (€3.14–€21.16)), antibiotic costs (AUD$14.88 ($7.55–$22.21) or €8.93(€4.53–€13.33)) and oral corticosteroid costs (AUD$4.73 ($0.82–$8.64) or €2.84(€0.49–€5.18)), all p<0.05. Overall healthcare and societal costs were lower (AUD$77.30 (€46.38) and AUD$256.22 (€153.73) respectively) albeit not statistically significant. The net monetary benefit of add-on AZM was estimated to be AUD$2072.30 (95% CI $1348.55–$2805.23) or (€1243.38 (€809.13–€1683.14) assuming a willingness to pay per exacerbation avoided of AUD$2651 (€1590.60). Irrespective of the sensitivity analysis applied, the net monetary benefit for total, moderate and severe exacerbations remained positive and significant.Add-on AZM therapy in poorly controlled asthma was a cost-effective therapy. Costs associated with AMR did not influence estimated cost-effectiveness.


2021 ◽  
pp. 096228022199597
Author(s):  
Andrew J Spieker ◽  
Nicholas Illenberger ◽  
Jason A Roy ◽  
Nandita Mitra

Considerations regarding clinical effectiveness and cost are essential in comparing the overall value of two treatments. There has been growing interest in methodology to integrate cost and effectiveness measures in order to inform policy and promote adequate resource allocation. The net monetary benefit aggregates information on differences in mean cost and clinical outcomes; the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve was developed to characterize the extent to which the strength of evidence regarding net monetary benefit changes with fluctuations in the willingness-to-pay threshold. Methods to derive insights from characteristics of the cost/clinical outcomes besides mean differences remain undeveloped but may also be informative. We propose a novel probabilistic measure of cost-effectiveness based on the stochastic ordering of the individual net benefit distribution under each treatment. Our approach is able to accommodate features frequently encountered in observational data including confounding and censoring, and complements the net monetary benefit in the insights it provides. We conduct a range of simulations to evaluate finite-sample performance and illustrate our proposed approach using simulated data based on a study of endometrial cancer patients.


2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Deisy Cristina Restrepo-Posada ◽  
Jaime Carmona-Fonseca ◽  
Jaiberth Antonio Cardona-Arias

Abstract Background Gestational malaria is associated with negative outcomes in maternal and gestational health; timely diagnosis is crucial to avoid complications. However, the limited infrastructure, equipment, test reagents, and trained staff make it difficult to use thick blood smear tests in rural areas, where rapid testing could be a viable alternative. The purpose of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of rapid tests type III (Plasmodium falciparum/Plasmodium spp P.f/pan) versus microscopic tests for the diagnosis and treatment of gestational malaria in Colombia. Methods Cost-effectiveness analyses of gestational malaria diagnosis from an institutional perspective using a decision tree. Standard costing was performed for the identification, measurement and assessment phases, with data from Colombian tariff manuals. The data was collected from Health Situation Analysis, SIVIGILA and meta-analysis. Average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were estimated. The uncertainty was assessed through probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results The cost of rapid diagnostic tests in 3,000 pregnant women with malaria was US$66,936 and 1,182 disability adjusted life years (DALYs) were estimated. The cost using thick blood smear tests was US$50,838 and 1,023 DALYs, for an incremental cost-effectiveness of US$ 101.2. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis of rapid diagnostic tests determined that they are highly cost-effective in 70% of the cases, even below the US$1,200 threshold; also, they showed an incremental net monetary benefit of $150,000 when payer’s willingness is US$1,000. Conclusion The use of rapid diagnostic tests for timely diagnosis and treatment of gestational malaria is a highly cost-effective strategy in Colombia, with uncertainty analyses supporting the robustness of this conclusion and the increased net monetary benefit that the health system would obtain. This strategy may help in preventing the negative effects on maternal health and the neonate at a low cost.


Mathematics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 566
Author(s):  
Julio Emilio Marco-Franco ◽  
Pedro Pita-Barros ◽  
Silvia González-de-Julián ◽  
Iryna Sabat ◽  
David Vivas-Consuelo

When exceptional situations, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, arise and reliable data is not available at decision-making times, estimation using mathematical models can provide a reasonable reckoning for health planning. We present a simplified model (static but with two-time references) for estimating the cost-effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine. A simplified model provides a quick assessment of the upper bound of cost-effectiveness, as we illustrate with data from Spain, and allows for easy comparisons between countries. It may also provide useful comparisons among different vaccines at the marketplace, from the perspective of the buyer. From the analysis of this information, key epidemiological figures, and costs of the disease for Spain have been estimated, based on mortality. The fatality rate is robust data that can alternatively be obtained from death registers, funeral homes, cemeteries, and crematoria. Our model estimates the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) to be 5132 € (4926–5276) as of 17 February 2021, based on the following assumptions/inputs: An estimated cost of 30 euros per dose (plus transport, storing, and administration), two doses per person, efficacy of 70% and coverage of 70% of the population. Even considering the possibility of some bias, this simplified model provides confirmation that vaccination against COVID-19 is highly cost-effective.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document