Faculty Opinions recommendation of The cost-effectiveness of birth-cohort screening for hepatitis C antibody in U.S. primary care settings.

Author(s):  
Doug Dieterich ◽  
Valerie Martel-Laferriere
2012 ◽  
Vol 156 (4) ◽  
pp. 263 ◽  
Author(s):  
David B. Rein ◽  
Bryce D. Smith ◽  
John S. Wittenborn ◽  
Sarah B. Lesesne ◽  
Laura D. Wagner ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabrina Assoumou ◽  
Abriana Tasillo ◽  
Jared A. Leff ◽  
Bruce R. Shackman ◽  
Mari-Lynn Drainoni ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Y. Lee ◽  
M. G. Harris ◽  
H. A. Whiteford ◽  
S. K. Davidson ◽  
M. L. Chatterton ◽  
...  

Abstract Aims Depression and anxiety are among the most common mental health conditions treated in primary care. They frequently co-occur and involve recommended treatments that overlap. Evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) shows specific stepped care interventions to be cost-effective in improving symptom remission. However, most RCTs have focused on either depression or anxiety, which limits their generalisability to routine primary care settings. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a collaborative stepped care (CSC) intervention to treat depression and/or anxiety among adults in Australian primary care settings. Method A quasi-decision tree model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a CSC intervention relative to care-as-usual (CAU). The model adapted a CSC intervention described in a previous Dutch RCT to the Australian context. This 8-month, cluster RCT recruited patients with depression and/or anxiety (n = 158) from 30 primary care clinics in the Netherlands. The CSC intervention involved two steps: (1) guided self-help with a nurse at a primary care clinic; and (2) referral to specialised mental healthcare. The cost-effectiveness model adopted a health sector perspective and synthesised data from two main sources: RCT data on intervention pathways, remission probabilities and healthcare service utilisation; and Australia-specific data on demography, epidemiology and unit costs from external sources. Incremental costs and incremental health outcomes were estimated across a 1-year time horizon. Health outcomes were measured as disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) due to remitted cases of depression and/or anxiety. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were measured in 2019 Australian dollars (A$) per DALY averted. Uncertainty and sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of cost-effectiveness findings. Result The CSC intervention had a high probability (99.6%) of being cost-effective relative to CAU. The resulting ICER (A$5207/DALY; 95% uncertainty interval: dominant to 25 345) fell below the willingness-to-pay threshold of A$50 000/DALY. ICERs were robust to changes in model parameters and assumptions. Conclusions This study found that a Dutch CSC intervention, with nurse-delivered guided self-help treatment as a first step, could potentially be cost-effective in treating depression and/or anxiety if transferred to the Australian primary care context. However, adaptations may be required to ensure feasibility and acceptability in the Australian healthcare context. In addition, further evidence is needed to verify the real-world cost-effectiveness of the CSC intervention when implemented in routine practice and to evaluate its effectiveness/cost-effectiveness when compared to other viable stepped care interventions for the treatment of depression and/or anxiety.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katelyn A Barnes ◽  
Zoe Szewczyk ◽  
Jaimon T Kelly ◽  
Katrina L Campbell ◽  
Lauren E Ball

Abstract Context Nutrition care is an effective lifestyle intervention for the treatment and prevention of many noncommunicable diseases. Primary care is a high-value setting in which to provide nutrition care. Objective The objective of this review was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nutrition care interventions provided in primary care settings. Data Sources Medline, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EconLit, and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) were searched from inception to May 2021. Data Extraction Data extraction was guided by the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) reporting guidelines. Randomized trials of nutrition interventions in primary care settings were included in the analysis if incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were reported. The main outcome variable incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and reported interpretations were used to categorize interventions by the cost-effectiveness plane quadrant. Results Of 6837 articles identified, 10 were included (representing 9 studies). Eight of the 9 included studies found nutrition care in primary care settings to be more costly and more effective than usual care . High study heterogeneity limited further conclusions. Conclusion Nutrition care in primary care settings is effective, though it requires investment; it should, therefore, be considered in primary care planning. Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of providing nutrition care in primary care settings. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registration no. CRD42020201146.


2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 761-769 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol A. Brownson ◽  
Thomas J. Hoerger ◽  
Edwin B. Fisher ◽  
Kerry E. Kilpatrick

Purpose The purpose of this study is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of diabetes self-management programs in real-world community primary care settings. Estimates incorporated lifetime reductions in disease progression, costs of adverse events, and increases in quality of life. Methods Clinical results and costs were based on programs of the Diabetes Initiative of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, implemented in primary care and community settings in disadvantaged areas with notable health disparities. Program results were used as inputs to a Markov simulation model to estimate the long-term effects of self-management interventions. A health systems perspective was adopted. Results The simulation model estimates that the intervention does reduce discounted lifetime treatment and complication costs by $3385, but this is more than offset by the $15 031 cost of implementing the intervention and maintaining its effects in subsequent years. The intervention is estimated to reduce long-term complications, leading to an increase in remaining life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is $39 563/QALY, well below a common benchmark of $50 000/QALY. Sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the model’s estimates under various alternative assumptions. The model generally predicts acceptable cost-effectiveness ratios. Conclusions Self-management programs for type 2 diabetes are cost-effective from a health systems perspective when the cost savings due to reductions in long-term complications are recognized. These findings may justify increased reimbursement for effective self-management programs in diverse settings.


2017 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 376-384 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabrina A Assoumou ◽  
Abriana Tasillo ◽  
Jared A Leff ◽  
Bruce R Schackman ◽  
Mari-Lynn Drainoni ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document