Cost-Effectiveness of a Multifaceted Podiatry Intervention for the Prevention of Falls in Older People: The REducing Falls with Orthoses and a Multifaceted Podiatry Intervention Trial Findings

Background: Falls are a major cause of morbidity among older people. Multifaceted interventions may be effective in preventing falls and related fractures. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness alongside the REducing Falls with Orthoses and a Multifaceted podiatry intervention (REFORM) trial. Methods: REFORM was a pragmatic multicentre cohort randomised controlled trial in England and Ireland; 1,010 participants (> 65 years) were randomised to receive either a podiatry intervention (n = 493), including foot and ankle strengthening exercises, foot orthoses, new footwear if required, and a falls prevention leaflet, or usual podiatry treatment plus a falls prevention leaflet (n = 517). Primary outcome: incidence of falls per participant in the 12 months following randomisation. Secondary outcomes: proportion of fallers and quality of life (EQ-5D-3L) which was converted into quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for each participant. Differences in mean costs and QALYs at 12 months were used to assess the cost-effectiveness of the intervention relative to usual care. Cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted in accordance with National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence reference case standards, using a regression-based approach with costs expressed in GBP (2015 price). The base case analysis used an intention-to-treat approach on the imputed data set using multiple imputation. Results: There was a small, non-statistically significant reduction in the incidence rate of falls in the intervention group (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.88, 95% CI 0.73–1.05, p = 0.16). Participants allocated to the intervention group accumulated on average marginally higher QALYs than the usual care participants (mean difference 0.0129, 95% CI –0.0050 to 0.0314). The intervention costs were on average GBP 252 more per participant compared to the usual care participants (95% CI GBP –69 to GBP 589). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged between GBP 19,494 and GBP 20,593 per QALY gained, below the conventional National Health Service cost-effectiveness thresholds of GBP 20,000 to GBP 30,000 per additional QALY. The probability that the podiatry intervention is cost-effective at a threshold of GBP 30,000 per QALY gained was 0.65. The results were robust to sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: The benefits of the intervention justified the moderate cost. The intervention could be a cost-effective option for falls prevention when compared with usual care in the UK.

Download Full-text

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for falls prevention in older people: a multicentre cohort randomised controlled trial (the REducing Falls with ORthoses and a Multifaceted podiatry intervention trial)

Health Technology Assessment ◽

10.3310/hta21240 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 21 (24) ◽

pp. 1-198 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Sarah Cockayne ◽

Sara Rodgers ◽

Lorraine Green ◽

Caroline Fairhurst ◽

Joy Adamson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Usual Care ◽

Incidence Rate ◽

Primary Outcome ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Intervention Group ◽

Clinical Effectiveness ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Falls Prevention ◽

Randomised Controlled

BackgroundFalls are a serious cause of morbidity and cost to individuals and society. Evidence suggests that foot problems and inappropriate footwear may increase the risk of falling. Podiatric interventions could help reduce falls; however, there is limited evidence regarding their clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.ObjectivesTo determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for preventing falls in community-dwelling older people at risk of falling, relative to usual care.DesignA pragmatic, multicentred, cohort randomised controlled trial with an economic evaluation and qualitative study.SettingNine NHS trusts in the UK and one site in Ireland.ParticipantsIn total, 1010 participants aged ≥ 65 years were randomised (intervention,n = 493; usual care,n = 517) via a secure, remote service. Blinding was not possible.InterventionsAll participants received a falls prevention leaflet and routine care from their podiatrist and general practitioner. The intervention also consisted of footwear advice, footwear provision if required, foot orthoses and foot- and ankle-strengthening exercises.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the incidence rate of falls per participant in the 12 months following randomisation. The secondary outcomes included the proportion of fallers and multiple fallers, time to first fall, fear of falling, fracture rate, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and cost-effectiveness.ResultsThe primary analysis consisted of 484 (98.2%) intervention and 507 (98.1%) usual-care participants. There was a non-statistically significant reduction in the incidence rate of falls in the intervention group [adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 1.05;p = 0.16]. The proportion of participants experiencing a fall was lower (50% vs. 55%, adjusted odds ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.00;p = 0.05). No differences were observed in key secondary outcomes. No serious, unexpected and related adverse events were reported. The intervention costs £252.17 more per participant (95% CI –£69.48 to £589.38) than usual care, was marginally more beneficial in terms of HRQoL measured via the EuroQoL-5 Dimensions [mean quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) difference 0.0129, 95% CI –0.0050 to 0.0314 QALYs] and had a 65% probability of being cost-effective at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold of £30,000 per QALY gained. The intervention was generally acceptable to podiatrists and trial participants.LimitationsOwing to the difficulty in calculating a sample size for a count outcome, the sample size was based on detecting a difference in the proportion of participants experiencing at least one fall, and not the primary outcome. We are therefore unable to confirm if the trial was sufficiently powered for the primary outcome. The findings are not generalisable to patients who are not receiving podiatry care.ConclusionsThe intervention was safe and potentially effective. Although the primary outcome measure did not reach significance, a lower fall rate was observed in the intervention group. The reduction in the proportion of older adults who experienced a fall was of borderline statistical significance. The economic evaluation suggests that the intervention could be cost-effective.Future workFurther research could examine whether or not the intervention could be delivered in group sessions, by physiotherapists, or in high-risk patients.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN68240461.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 24. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Download Full-text

The cost-effectiveness of early goaldirected therapy: an economic evaluation alongside the ARISE trial

Critical Care and Resuscitation ◽

10.51893/2021.3.oa10 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 23 (3) ◽

pp. 329-336

Author(s):

Alisa M Higgins ◽

◽

Sandra L Peake ◽

Rinaldo Bellomo AO ◽

D Jamie Cooper AO ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Health Care ◽

Septic Shock ◽

Economic Evaluation ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Usual Care ◽

Resource Use ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Evaluation Study ◽

Life Years ◽

The Cost

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) for patients with early septic shock. DESIGN: Within-trial cost-effectiveness evaluation. SETTING: Nineteen hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Patients with early septic shock enrolled in the Australasian Resuscitation in Sepsis Evaluation (ARISE) trial were randomly assigned to EGDT versus usual care. A subgroup of patients participated in a nested economic evaluation study in which detailed resource use data were collected until 12 months after randomisation. OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical outcomes included lives saved, life-years gained and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), with mortality collected until 12 months and health-related quality of life assessed at baseline, 6 and 12 months using the 3-level EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L). Economic outcomes included health care resource use, costs and cost-effectiveness from the Australian health care payer perspective. RESULTS: A total of 205 patients (100 EGDT, 105 usual care) participated in the nested economic evaluation study, of which 203 had complete resource use data. Unadjusted mean health care costs to 12 months were $67 223 (standard deviation [SD], $72 397) in the EGDT group and $54 179 (SD, $61 980) in the usual care group, with a mean difference of $13 044 (95% CI, −$5791 to $31 878). There was no difference between groups with regards to lives saved (EGDT, 69.4% v usual care, 68.6%; P = 1.0), life-years gained (mean EGDT, 0.746 [SD, 0.406] v usual care, 0.725 [SD, 0.417]; P = 0.72) or QALYs (mean EGDT, 0.318 [SD, 0.291] v usual care, 0.367 [SD, 0.295]; P = 0.24). EGDT was dominated (higher costs, lower effectiveness) by usual care in 80.4% of bootstrap replications. For a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 per QALY, the probability of EGDT being cost-effective was only 6.4%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients presenting to the emergency department with early septic shock, EGDT compared with usual care was not cost-effective. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00975793.

Download Full-text

Is telehealthcare for heart failure patients cost-effective? An economic evaluation alongside the Danish TeleCare North heart failure trial

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031670 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

pp. e031670 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Anne Sig Vestergaard ◽

Louise Hansen ◽

Sabrina Storgaard Sørensen ◽

Morten Berg Jensen ◽

Lars Holger Ehlers

Keyword(s):

Heart Failure ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Usual Care ◽

Intervention Group ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Care Group ◽

Blood Pressure Monitor ◽

Heart Failure Patients ◽

Life Years

ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of telehealthcare in heart failure patients as add-on to usual care.DesignA cost-utility analysis was conducted from a public payer perspective alongside the randomised controlled TeleCare North trial.SettingThe North Denmark Region, Denmark.ParticipantsThe study included 274 heart failure patients with self-reported New York Heart Association class II-IV.InterventionsPatients in the intervention group were provided with a Telekit consisting of a tablet, a digital blood pressure monitor, and a scale and were instructed to perform measurements one to two times a week. The responsibility of the education, instructions and monitoring of the heart failure (HF) patients was placed on municipality nurses trained in HF and telemonitoring. Both groups received usual care.Outcome measuresCost-effectiveness was reported as incremental net monetary benefit (NMB). A micro-costing approach was applied to evaluate the derived savings in the first year in the public health sector. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained were estimated using the EuroQol 5-Dimensions 5-Levels questionnaire at baseline and at a 1-year follow-up.ResultsData for 274 patients were included in the main analysis. The telehealthcare solution provided a positive incremental NMB of £5164. The 1-year adjusted QALY difference between the telehealthcare solution and the usual care group was 0.0034 (95% CI: −0.0711 to 0.0780). The adjusted difference in costs was -£5096 (95% CI: −8736 to −1456) corresponding to a reduction in total healthcare costs by 35%. All sensitivity analyses showed the main results were robust.ConclusionsThe TeleCare North solution for monitoring HF was highly cost-effective. There were significant cost savings on hospitalisations, primary care contacts and total costs.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov:NCT02860013.

Download Full-text

Economic evaluation of a novel community-based diabetes care model in rural Mexico: a cost and cost-effectiveness study

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046826 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (4) ◽

pp. e046826

Author(s):

Kevin I Duan ◽

Francisco Rodriguez Garza ◽

Hugo Flores ◽

Daniel Palazuelos ◽

Jimena Maza ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Incremental Cost ◽

Usual Care ◽

Diabetes Care ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Care Model ◽

Community Based ◽

Life Years ◽

Rural Mexico ◽

The Cost

ObjectivesDiabetes is the leading cause of disability-adjusted life years in Mexico, and cost-effective care models are needed to address the epidemic. We sought to evaluate the cost and cost-effectiveness of a novel community-based model of diabetes care in rural Mexico, compared with usual care.DesignWe performed time-driven activity-based costing to estimate annualised costs associated with typical diabetes care in Chiapas, Mexico, as well as a novel diabetes care model known as Compañeros En Salud Programa de Enfermedades Crónicas (CESPEC). We conducted Markov chain analysis to estimate the cost-effectiveness of CESPEC compared with usual care from a societal perspective. We used patient outcomes from CESPEC in 2016, as well as secondary data from existing literature.SettingRural primary care clinics in Chiapas, Mexico.ParticipantsAdults with diabetes.InterventionsCESPEC is a novel, comprehensive, diabetes care model that integrates community health workers, provider education, supply chain management and active case finding.Outcome measureThe primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness of CESPEC compared with care as usual, per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, expressed in 2016 US dollars.ResultsThe economic cost of the CESPEC diabetes model was US$144 per patient per year, compared with US$125 for diabetes care as usual. However, CESPEC care was associated with 0.13 additional years of health-adjusted life expectancy compared with usual care and 0.02 additional years in the first 5 years of treatment. This translated to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$2981 per QALY gained over a patient’s lifetime and an ICER of US$10 444 over the first 5 years. Findings were robust to multiple sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsCESPEC is a cost-effective, community-based model of diabetes care for patients in rural Mexico. Given the high prevalence and significant morbidity associated with diabetes in Mexico and other countries in Central America, this model should be considered for broader scale up and evaluation.

Download Full-text

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of BCG Vaccination against Tuberculosis in Indonesia: A Model-Based Study

Vaccines ◽

10.3390/vaccines8040707 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 8 (4) ◽

pp. 707

Author(s):

Afifah Machlaurin ◽

Franklin Christiaan Karel Dolk ◽

Didik Setiawan ◽

Tjipke Sytse van der Werf ◽

Maarten J. Postma

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Univariate Analysis ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Epidemiological Data ◽

Control Programme ◽

Detection Rates ◽

Middle Income ◽

Bcg Vaccination ◽

Life Years ◽

The Cost

Bacillus Calmette–Guerin (BCG), the only available vaccine for tuberculosis (TB), has been applied for decades. The Indonesian government recently introduced a national TB disease control programme that includes several action plans, notably enhanced vaccination coverage, which can be strengthened through underpinning its favourable cost-effectiveness. We designed a Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of Indonesia’s current BCG vaccination programme. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were evaluated from the perspectives of both society and healthcare. The robustness of the analysis was confirmed through univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). Using epidemiological data compiled for Indonesia, BCG vaccination at a price US$14 was estimated to be a cost-effective strategy in controlling TB disease. From societal and healthcare perspectives, ICERs were US$104 and US$112 per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), respectively. The results were robust for variations of most variables in the univariate analysis. Notably, the vaccine’s effectiveness regarding disease protection, vaccination costs, and case detection rates were key drivers for cost-effectiveness. The PSA results indicated that vaccination was cost-effective even at US$175 threshold in 95% of cases, approximating the monthly GDP per capita. Our findings suggest that this strategy was highly cost-effective and merits prioritization and extension within the national TB programme. Our results may be relevant for other high endemic low- and middle-income countries.

Download Full-text

OP0198-HPR A STRUCTURED MODEL FOR OA CARE IN PRIMARY HEALTHCARE IS A COST-EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE COMPARED TO USUAL CARE FOR PEOPLE WITH HIP AND KNEE OA

Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases ◽

10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-eular.950 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽

pp. 119-120

Author(s):

N. Østerås ◽

E. Aas ◽

T. Moseng ◽

L. Van Bodegom-Vos ◽

K. Dziedzic ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Usual Care ◽

Primary Healthcare ◽

Intervention Group ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Cost Utility ◽

Control Group ◽

Structured Model ◽

Knee Oa ◽

Cost Effective Alternative ◽

The Cost

Background:To improve quality of care for patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), a structured model for integrated OA care was developed based on international treatment recommendations. A previous analysis of a cluster RCT (cRCT) showed that compared to usual care, the intervention group reported higher quality of care and greater satisfaction with care. Also, more patients were treated according to international guidelines and fulfilled recommendations for physical activity at the 6-month follow-up.Objectives:To assess the cost-utility of a structured model for hip or knee OA care.Methods:A cRCT with stepped-wedge cohort design was conducted in 6 Norwegian municipalities (clusters) in 2015-17. The OA care model was implemented in one cluster at the time by switching from “usual care” to the structured model. The implementation of the model was facilitated by interactive workshops for general practitioners (GPs) and physiotherapists (PTs) with an update on OA treatment recommendations. The GPs explained the OA diagnosis and treatment alternatives, provided pharmacological treatment when appropriate, and suggested referral to physiotherapy. The PT-led patient OA education programme was group-based and lasted 3 hours followed by an 8–12-week individually tailored resistance exercise programme with twice weekly 1-hour supervised group sessions (5–10 patients per PT). An optional 10-hours Healthy Eating Program was available. Participants were ≥45 years with symptomatic hip or knee OA.Costs were measured from the healthcare perspective and collected from several sources. Patients self-reported visits in primary healthcare at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Secondary healthcare visits and joint surgery data were extracted from the Norwegian Patient Register. The health outcome, quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), was estimated based on the EQ-5D-5L scores at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. The result of the cost-utility analysis was reported using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), defined as the incremental costs relative to incremental QALYs (QALYs gained). Based on Norwegian guidelines, the threshold is €27500. Sensitivity analyses were performed using bootstrapping to assess the robustness of reported results and presented in a cost-effectiveness plane (Figure 1).Results:The 393 patients’ mean age was 63 years (SD 9.6) and 74% were women. 109 patients were recruited during control periods (control group), and 284 patients were recruited during interventions periods (intervention group). Only the intervention group had a significant increase in EQ-5D-5L utility scores from baseline to 12 months follow-up (mean change 0.03; 95% CI 0.01, 0.05) with QALYs gained: 0.02 (95% CI -0.08, 0.12). The structured OA model cost approx. €301 p.p. with an additional €50 for the Healthy Eating Program. Total 12 months healthcare cost p.p. was €1281 in the intervention and €3147 in the control group, resulting in an incremental cost of -€1866 (95% CI -3147, -584) p.p. Costs related to surgical procedures had the largest impact on total healthcare costs in both groups. During the 12-months follow-up period, 5% (n=14) in the intervention compared to 12% (n=13) in the control group underwent joint surgery; resulting in a mean surgical procedure cost of €553 p.p. in the intervention as compared to €1624 p.p. in the control group. The ICER was -€93300, indicating that the OA care model resulted in QALYs gained and cost-savings. At a threshold of €27500, it is 99% likely that the OA care model is a cost-effective alternative.Conclusion:The results of the cost-utility analysis show that implementing a structured model for OA care in primary healthcare based on international guidelines is highly likely a cost-effective alternative compared to usual care for people with hip and knee OA. More studies are needed to confirm this finding, but this study results indicate that implementing structured OA care models in primary healthcare may be beneficial for the individual as well as for the society.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Download Full-text

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Submandibular Gland Preservation With Sialendoscopy for the Management of Sialolithiasis

Otolaryngology ◽

10.1177/01945998211026847 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 019459982110268

Author(s):

Joseph R. Acevedo ◽

Ashley C. Hsu ◽

Jeffrey C. Yu ◽

Dale H. Rice ◽

Daniel I. Kwon ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Submandibular Gland ◽

Average Cost ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Life Years ◽

Probability Of Success ◽

Markov Decision Model ◽

The Cost

Objective To compare the cost-effectiveness of sialendoscopy with gland excision for the management of submandibular gland sialolithiasis. Study Design Cost-effectiveness analysis. Setting Outpatient surgery centers. Methods A Markov decision model compared the cost-effectiveness of sialendoscopy versus gland excision for managing submandibular gland sialolithiasis. Surgical outcome probabilities were found in the primary literature. The quality of life of patients was represented by health utilities, and costs were estimated from a third-party payer’s perspective. The effectiveness of each intervention was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The incremental costs and effectiveness of each intervention were compared, and a willingness-to-pay ratio of $150,000 per QALY was considered cost-effective. One-way, multivariate, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to challenge model conclusions. Results Over 10 years, sialendoscopy yielded 9.00 QALYs at an average cost of $8306, while gland excision produced 8.94 QALYs at an average cost of $6103. The ICER for sialendoscopy was $36,717 per QALY gained, making sialendoscopy cost-effective by our best estimates. The model was sensitive to the probability of success and the cost of sialendoscopy. Sialendoscopy must meet a probability-of-success threshold of 0.61 (61%) and cost ≤$11,996 to remain cost-effective. A Monte Carlo simulation revealed sialendoscopy to be cost-effective 60% of the time. Conclusion Sialendoscopy appears to be a cost-effective management strategy for sialolithiasis of the submandibular gland when certain thresholds are maintained. Further studies elucidating the clinical factors that determine successful sialendoscopy may be aided by these thresholds as well as future comparisons of novel technology.

Download Full-text

A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses Alongside Randomised Controlled Trials of Acupuncture

Acupuncture in Medicine ◽

10.1136/acupmed-2012-010178 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 30 (4) ◽

pp. 273-285 ◽

Cited By ~ 38

Author(s):

Song-Yi Kim ◽

Hyangsook Lee ◽

Younbyoung Chae ◽

Hi-Joon Park ◽

Hyejung Lee

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Usual Care ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Economic Evaluations ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

German Studies ◽

Life Years ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

The Cost

Objective To summarise the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture. Methods We identified full economic evaluations such as cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), cost-utility analysis (CUA) and cost-benefit analysis (CBA) alongside randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the consequences and costs of acupuncture for any medical condition. Eleven electronic databases were searched up to March 2011 without language restrictions. Eligible RCTs were assessed using the Cochrane criteria for risk of bias and a modified version of the checklist for economic evaluation. The general characteristics and the results of each economic analysis such as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were extracted. Results Of 17 included studies, nine were CUAs that measured quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and eight were CEAs that assessed effectiveness of acupuncture based on improvements in clinical symptoms. All CUAs showed that acupuncture with or without usual care was cost-effective compared with waiting list control or usual care alone, with ICERs ranging from ¢3011/QALY (dysmenorrhoea) to ¢22 298/QALY (allergic rhinitis) in German studies, and from £3855/QALY (osteoarthritis) to £9951/QALY (headache) in UK studies. In the CEAs, acupuncture was beneficial at a relatively low cost in six European and Asian studies. All CUAs were well-designed with a low risk of bias, but this was not the case for CEAs. Conclusions Overall, this review demonstrates the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture. Despite such promising results, any generalisation of these results needs to be made with caution given the diversity of diseases and the different status of acupuncture in the various countries.

Download Full-text

Cladribine tablets are a cost-effective strategy in high-disease activity relapsing multiple sclerosis patients in Iran

Current Journal of Neurology ◽

10.18502/cjn.v20i3.7690 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Nayyereh Ayati ◽

Lora Fleifel ◽

Mohammad Ali Sahraian ◽

Shekoufeh Nikfar

Keyword(s):

Multiple Sclerosis ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Disease Activity ◽

Cost Effective ◽

High Disease Activity ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Life Years ◽

Multiple Sclerosis Patients ◽

The Cost ◽

Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis

Background: Cladribine tablets are the foremost oral immune-reconstitution therapy for high disease activity relapsing multiple sclerosis (HDA-RMS). We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of cladribine tablets compared to natalizumab in patients with HDA-RMS in Iran. Methods: A 5-year cohort-based Markov model was developed with 11 expanded disability status score (EDSS) health states, including patients with HDA-RMS as on and off-treatment. All costs were identified from the literature and expert opinion and were measured in Iranian Rial rates, changed to the 2020 USD rate and were discounted by 7.2%. Quality adjusted life years (QALY), discounted by 3.5%, and life years gained (LYG) were adopted to measure efficacy. The final results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio that was compared to a national willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of 1 to 3 gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (D/PSA) were employed to evaluate uncertainty. Results: Cladribine tablets dominated natalizumab and yielded 6,607 USD cost-saving and 0.003 additional QALYs per patient. LYG was comparable. The main cost component was drug acquisition cost in both arms. DSA indicated the sensitivity of the results to the cost discount rates and also the patients’ body weight; while they were less sensitive to the main clinical variables. PSA indicated that cladribine tablets were cost-effective in Iran, with a probability of 57.5% and 58.6% at lower and higher limits of threshold, respectively. Conclusion: Cladribine tablets yielded higher QALYs and lower costs compared to natalizumab, in patients with HDA-RMS in Iran.

Download Full-text

Obesity and Surgical Treatment – A Cost-Effectiveness Assessment for Sweden

Nordic Journal of Health Economics ◽

10.5617/njhe.207 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 2 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Sixten Borg ◽

Ingmar Näslund ◽

Ulf Persson ◽

Knut Ödegaard

Keyword(s):

Gastric Bypass ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Conventional Treatment ◽

Bypass Surgery ◽

Gastric Bypass Surgery ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Health Concern ◽

Life Years ◽

Diet And Exercise ◽

The Cost

Background:The rising trend in the prevalence of obesity has during the past decades become a major public health concern in many countries, as obesity may lead to comorbidities and death. A frequent used marker for obesity is the Body Mass Index (BMI). The cost of treatment for obesity related diseases has become a heavy burden on national health care budget in many countries. While diet and exercise are the cornerstones of weight management, pharmacotherapy is often needed to achieve and maintain desired weight loss. In some cases of extreme obesity, bariatric surgery may be recommended. It is expected to increase by 50% in Sweden.Objective: The overall objective was to develop a cost-effectiveness model using the best available evidence to assess the cost-effectiveness of gastric bypass (GBP) surgical treatments for obesity in adult patients, in comparison with conventional treatment (CT), in Sweden from a healthcare perspective. With the model we also seeked to identify the lower cut-off point using BMI criteria, for the surgical intervention to be cost-effective. Methods:A micro-simulation model with an underlying Markov methodology was developed, that simulates individual patients. It simulates the outcomes of the patients in terms of treatment costs, life years, and quality adjusted life years (QALY) over his/her remaining lifetime. The costs are presented in SEK in the year 2006 price level (1 SEK ≈ 0.11 EUR ≈ 0.14 USD).Results: We estimated that the incremental cost per QALY gained will not exceed SEK 33,000 per QALY in patients with BMI < 35. In patients with BMI > 35 kg/m2, gastric bypass surgery has lower costs compared to conventional treatment. Conclusion: Gastric bypass surgery is a cost-effective intervention compared to conventional treatment consisting of watchful waiting, diet and exercise.

Download Full-text