scholarly journals A Cross-Sectional Study of Client Satisfaction towards Services Received at Boru Meda Hospital Pharmacy on Opd Basis and Community Pharmacy

2017 ◽  
pp. 26-31
Author(s):  
Abebaw Tegegn Damtie ◽  
Assen Muhe Getahun

Background: World Health Organization and Ministry of Health (Uganda) recommend use of microscopy for parasitological confirmation of malaria. Microscopy involves either Giemsa or Fields staining techniques. Ministry of Health prefers and recommends use of Giemsa staining technique but most health facilities still use Fields staining technique. The objective of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of Giemsa and Fields staining techniques in order to inform malaria diagnosis policy and practice in Uganda. Methods: This was a cross sectional cost effectiveness analysis from the providers perspective covering the period between April 25, 2014 and June 15, 2014. The study involved 243 children below five years of age presenting at Acute Care Unit laboratory for malaria test before admission. Giemsa and Fields staining techniques were compared with Polymerase Chain Reaction as the gold standard. Decision tree analytic model in TreeAge was used for the cost effectiveness analysis. Results: Fields and Giemsa staining techniques cost US $ 0.030 and US $ 0.769 respectively. Correctly diagnosed cases were 227 and 230 for Fields and Giemsa staining techniques respectively. The proportion of correctly diagnosed cases was 93.4% for Fields and 94.7% for Giemsa. Incremental cost effectiveness ratio was 0.35 US $ per additional correctly diagnosed case. Conclusion: Fields staining technique was more cost effective than Giemsa staining technique; provided a higher number of correctly diagnosed cases at a lower cost than Giemsa staining technique. Fields staining technique is recommended as staining technique for malaria diagnosis at the Acute Care Unit of Mulago National Referral Hospital. This implies that even with introduction of more superior staining techniques for laboratory diagnosis of malaria, Field staining technique is still a cost effective technique to be used in resource limited settings with high malaria burden like Uganda and Africa at large.

2016 ◽  
pp. 26-32
Author(s):  
Juliana Namutundu ◽  
Nsobya Samuel Lubwama ◽  
Yeka Adoke ◽  
Chrispus Mayora ◽  
Sebastian Olikira Baine

Background: World Health Organization and Ministry of Health (Uganda) recommend use of microscopy for parasitological confirmation of malaria. Microscopy involves either Giemsa or Field’s staining techniques. Ministry of Health prefers and recommends use of Giemsa staining technique but most health facilities still use Field’s staining technique. The objective of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of Giemsa and Field’s staining techniques in order to inform malaria diagnosis policy and practice in Uganda. Methods: This was a cross sectional cost effectiveness analysis from the provider’s perspective covering the period between April 25, 2014 and June 15, 2014. The study involved 243 children below five years of age presenting at Acute Care Unit laboratory for malaria test before admission. Giemsa and Field’s staining techniques were compared with Polymerase Chain Reaction as the gold standard. Decision tree analytic model in TreeAge was used for the cost effectiveness analysis. Results : Field’s and Giemsa staining techniques cost US $ 0.030 and US $ 0.769 respectively. Correctly diagnosed cases were 227 and 230 for Field’s and Giemsa staining techniques respectively. The proportion of correctly diagnosed cases was 93.4% for Field’s and 94.7% for Giemsa. Incremental cost effectiveness ratio was 0.35 US $ per additional correctly diagnosed case. Conclusion: Field’s staining technique was more cost effective than Giemsa staining technique; provided a higher number of correctly diagnosed cases at a lower cost than Giemsa staining technique. Field’s staining technique is recommended as staining technique for malaria diagnosis at the Acute Care Unit of Mulago National Referral Hospital. This implies that even with introduction of more superior staining techniques for laboratory diagnosis of malaria, Field staining technique is still a cost effective technique to be used in resource limited settings with high malaria burden like Uganda and Africa at large.


1996 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Afaf Girgis ◽  
Philip Clarke ◽  
Robert C Burton ◽  
Rob W Sanson—Fisher

Background and design— Australia has the highest rates of skin cancer in the world, and the incidence is estimated to be doubling every 10 years. Despite advances in the early detection and treatment of melanoma about 800 people still die nationally of the disease each year. A possible strategy for further reducing the mortality from melanoma is an organised programme of population screening for unsuspected lesions in asymptomatic people. Arguments against introducing melanoma screening have been based on cost and the lack of reliable data on the efficacy of any screening tests. To date, however, there has been no systematic economic assessment of the cost effectiveness of melanoma screening. The purpose of this research was to determine whether screening may be potentially cost effective and, therefore, warrants further investigation. A computer was used to simulate the effects of a hypothetical melanoma screening programme that was in operation for 20 years, using cohorts of Australians aged 50 at the start of the programme. Based on this simulation, cost—effectiveness estimates of melanoma screening were calculated. Results— Under the standard assumptions used in the model, and setting the sensitivity of the screening test (visual inspection of the skin) at 60%, cost effectiveness ranged from Aust$6853 per life year saved for men if screening was undertaken five yearly to $12137 if screening was two yearly. For women, it ranged from $11 102 for five yearly screening to $20 877 for two yearly screening. Conclusion— The analysis suggests that a melanoma screening programme could be cost effective, particularly if five yearly screening is implemented by family practitioners for men over the age of 50.


2021 ◽  
pp. 019459982110268
Author(s):  
Joseph R. Acevedo ◽  
Ashley C. Hsu ◽  
Jeffrey C. Yu ◽  
Dale H. Rice ◽  
Daniel I. Kwon ◽  
...  

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.


Author(s):  
Milton C. Weinstein

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a method of economic evaluation that can be used to assess the efficiency with which health care technologies use limited resources to produce health outputs. However, inconsistencies in the way that such ratios are constructed often lead to misleading conclusions when CEAs are compared. Some of these inconsistencies, such as failure to discount or to calculate incremental ratios correctly, reflect analytical errors that, if corrected, would resolve the inconsistencies. Others reflect fundamental differences in the viewpoint of the analysis. The perspectives of different decision-making entities can properly lead to different items in the numerator and denominator of the cost-effectiveness (C/E) ratio. Producers and consumers of CEA need to be more conscious of the perspectives of analysis, so that C/E comparisons from a given perspective are based upon a common understanding of the elements that are properly included.


2021 ◽  
Vol 104 (5) ◽  
pp. 818-824

Background: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) causes blindness of the population in many countries worldwide. Early detection and treatment of this disease via a DR screening program is the best way to secure the vision. An annual screening program using pharmacological pupil dilatation becomes the standard method. Recently, non-mydriatic ultrawide-field fundus photography (UWF) has been proposed as a choice for DR screening. However, there was no cost-effectiveness study between the standard DR screening and this UWF approach. Objective: To compare the cost-effectiveness between UWF and pharmacological pupil dilatation in terms of hospital and societal perspectives. Materials and Methods: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus that visited the ophthalmology clinic at Chulabhorn Hospital for DR screening were randomized using simple randomization method. The patients were interviewed by a trained interviewer for general and economic information. The clinical characteristics of DR and staging were recorded. Direct medical costs, direct non-medical costs, and informal care costs due to DR screening were recorded. Cost analyses were calculated for the hospital and societal perspectives. Results: The present study presented the cost-effectiveness analyses of UWF versus pharmacological pupil dilatation. Cost-effectiveness analysis from the hospital perspective showed the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of UWF to be –13.87. UWF was a cost-effective mean in DR screening in the societal perspective when compared with pharmacologically pupil dilatation with the ICER of 76.46, under the threshold of willingness to pay. Conclusion: The UWF was a cost-effective mean in DR screening. It can reduce screening duration and bypass post-screening blurred vision. The results suggested that UWF could be a viable option for DR screening. Keywords: Diabetic retinopathy, Diabetic retinopathy screening, Non-mydriatic ultrawide-field fundus photography, Cost-effectiveness analysis


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-112
Author(s):  
Amelia Lorensia ◽  
Doddy De Queljoe ◽  
Made Dwike Swari Santi

The number of typhoid fever patient in Indonesia is still high. Typhoid fever can be treated by antibiotic therapy such as chloramphenicol and ceftriaxone. The purpose of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of chloramphenicol and ceftriaxone which was given to adult patients who were diagnosed with typhoid fever in Sanglah Denpasar Hospital. A comparative study between two alternatives was conducted using the hospital perspective. Retrospective method was used to collect data from patient medical records, who was diagnosed and hospitalized in Sanglah Denpasar Hospital during January 2017 until July 2018. The cost analysis was perform using cost-effectiveness grid and cost-effectiveness ratio (ACER) methods. Cost-effectiveness grid showed that dominant of ceftriaxone for patient with typhoid fever. ACER analysis for ceftriaxone was IDR 2,097,170.88 with effectivenes (length of stay) 4.27 days, and was IDR 2,097,170.88 with effectiveness (the time of reaching normal temperature) 2.42 days. ACER analysis for chloramphenicol was IDR 2,555,464.22        with effectivenes (length of stay) 10.22 days, and was IDR 2,555,464.22 with effectiveness (the time of reaching normal temperature) 3.44 days. ACER analysis showed lower degree of ceftriaxone and higher effectiveness based on length of stay and the time of reaching normal temperature. The conclusion of this study is that ceftriaxone is more cost-effective than chloramphenicol.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Osvaldinete Lopes de Oliveira Silva ◽  
Marina Ferreira Rea ◽  
Flávia Mori Sarti ◽  
Gabriela Buccini

Abstract Objective: To analyse the cost-effectiveness of Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) in promoting breast-feeding during the first hour of life (BFFHL) and reducing late neonatal mortality. Design: Cost-effectiveness economic assessment from the health system perspective, preceded by a prospective cohort of mother–baby followed from birth to 6 months of life. The direct costs associated with two health outcomes were analysed: intermediate end point (BFFHL) and final end point (reduction in late neonatal mortality). Setting: Study was carried out in six hospitals in the city of São Paulo (Brazil), three being Baby-Friendly Hospitals (BFH) and three non-BFH. Participants: Mothers with 24 h postpartum, over 18 years old, single fetus and breast-feeding at the time of the interview were included. Poisson regressions adjusted for maternal age and level of education were estimated to identify factors related to BFFHL and late neonatal mortality. Sensitivity analysis was performed to ensure robustness of the economic assessment. Results: Cost-effectiveness analysis showed that BFHI was highly cost-effective in raising BFFHL by 32·0 % at lower cost in comparison with non-BFHI. In addition, BFHI was cost-effective in reducing late neonatal mortality rate by 13·0 % from all causes and by 13·1 % of infant mortality rate from infections. Conclusions: The cost-effectiveness of the BFHI in promoting breast-feeding and reducing neonatal mortality rates justifies the investments required for its expansion within the Brazilian health system.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Honghao Shi ◽  
Wanjie Guo ◽  
He Zhu ◽  
Meng Li ◽  
Carolina Oi Lam Ung ◽  
...  

Xiyanping injection (andrographolide sulfonate) has shown clinical effects on community acquired pneumonia. However, there is little known about the effectiveness and costs of combining Xiyanping injection with conventional treatment on adult community acquired pneumonia in daily practice. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of combining Xiyanping injection with conventional treatment for treatment of adult community acquired pneumonia by comparing with conventional treatment from a societal perspective. Using retrospective cohort method, this study demonstrates that Xiyanping injection combined with conventional treatment is superior to conventional treatment for patients using cephalosporins and antibiotics under the effectiveness index of length of hospital stay and is more cost-effective.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Fujita ◽  
S Kusumoto ◽  
M Sugiyama ◽  
T Fujisawa ◽  
M Mizokami ◽  
...  

Abstract Background There is no worldwide standard recommendation for preventing hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation for patients with resolved infection treated with an anti-CD20 antibody for B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness between two commonly used strategies to prevent HBV reactivation-related death. Methods The two strategies compared were prophylactic antiviral therapy (Pro NAT) and HBV DNA monitoring followed by on-demand antiviral therapy (HBV DNA monitoring) using entecavir (Entecavir, a generic drug for Baraclude). Effectiveness was defined as the prevention of death due to HBV reactivation and costs were calculated under the health insurance system of Japan as of April 2018 using Markov model. A cost-minimization analysis, one of the cost-effectiveness analyses, was applied, since the effectiveness was the same between the two strategies according to a meta-analysis. To consider the effect of uncertainty for each parameter, probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed. In the scenario analysis, costs were calculated using lamivudine (Zefix) or tenofovir alafenamide (Vemlidy) instead of entecavir. All analyses were done using TreeAge Pro 2019 (TreeAge Software, Inc., MA, USA). Results Estimated costs per patient during the 30 months after initiation of chemotherapy for lymphoma were 1,513 USD with Pro NAT and 1,265 USD with HBV DNA monitoring. A PSA revealed that HBV DNA monitoring was more consistently cost-effective compared with Pro NAT when some parameters were set randomly according to probability distributions. In our scenario analysis, costs of Pro NAT and HBV DNA monitoring were calculated as 2,762 and 1,401 USD using lamivudine, 4,857 and 1,629 USD using tenofovir alafenamide. Conclusions Our cost-effectiveness analysis shows that an HBV DNA monitoring strategy using entecavir should be recommended for preventing HBV reactivation-related death in Japan. Key messages Cost-effectiveness analysis demonstrated that HBV DNA monitoring was more cost-effective compared to Pro NAT; this result was consistent with PSA. HBV DNA monitoring strategy should be recommended to prevent HBV reactivation-related death for the patients with resolved HBV infection in Japan.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document