Healthcare Payer Research Articles

Cost-effectiveness of a specialist palliative care nurse-patient consultation followed by an interprofessional case conference for patients with non-oncological palliative care needs: results of the KOPAL trial.

Worldwide, progressive chronic, non-malignant diseases are highly prevalent. Especially with increasing age, they are characterised by high hospitalisation rates and high healthcare costs. Improved interprofessional collaboration between general practitioners (GPs) and specialist palliative home care (SPHC) teams might reduce hospitalisation while improving symptoms and quality of life, or preventing them from deterioration. The aim of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of a newly developed intervention in patients with advanced chronic, non-malignant diseases consisting of a structured palliative care nurse-patient consultation followed by an interprofessional telephone case conference. The analysis was based on data from 172 participants of the KOPAL multi-centre, cluster randomised controlled trial. Patients with advanced congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or dementia were randomised into intervention group (IG) and control group (CG, usual care). Cost-effectiveness was examined over 48 weeks from a societal and healthcare payer's perspective. Effects were quantified as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs, EQ-5D-5L). Incremental costeffectiveness ratios were calculated and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were constructed. Baseline imbalances in costs and effects could be observed between IG and CG. After adjusting for these imbalances and compared to the CG, mean costs in the IG were non-significantly higher from a societal and lower from a payer's perspective. On the effect side, the IG had marginally lower mean QALYs. The results were characterized by high statistical uncertainty, indicated by large confidence intervals for the cost and effect differences between groups and probabilities of cost-effectiveness between 18% and 65%, depending on the perspective and willingness-to-pay. Based on the results of this study, the cost-effectiveness of the KOPAL intervention was uncertain. The results highlighted (methodological) challenges of economic evaluations in patients with chronic, non-malignant diseases related to sample size, heterogeneity of participants, and the way the intervention effectiveness is typically captured in economic evaluations.

Social determinants of health profiles and survival among US cancer survivors: A cluster analysis.

402 Background: Healthcare payers and clinicians increasingly focus on social determinants of health (SDOH) to reduce disparities in care and improve patient outcomes in US. Prognostic value of single SDOH factors has been described, but not for clusters of multiple SDOHs. We characterize cancer survivors by their SDOH profiles and examine associations with survival. Methods: 11,237 cancer survivors were identified from the 2013-2018 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) with linkage to NHIS Mortality Files. 9 SDOHs were included in 5 a priori identified domains: 1) healthcare access (medical financial hardship, delayed care due to transportation and/or other barriers); 2) economic instability (unemployment, food insecurity, housing insecurity); 3) social isolation (marital status); 4) education and literacy (< high school education); and 5) neighborhood quality (low neighborhood social cohesion (nSC) based on 4 item scale developed by the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods Community Survey). The most significant SDOH in each domain was identified with Cox regressions. We then clustered patients into 5 groups using the inter-person Gower distance of the 5 selected SDOHs and examined survival among each cluster adjusting for age, sex, race, region, and survey era. Results: 5 distinct clusters of cancer survivors were identified with top-ranking SDOHs in each domain: 1) Healthy Hopefuls: young, employed, and married with fewer socio-economic and health burdens; 2) Independent Phoenixes: single, employed rising above adversity, maintaining health and financial wellness; 3) Enduring Companions: older, unemployed, and married navigating health challenges while maintaining financial stability; 4) Solo Warriors: older, single, unemployed with health complications and financial hardships; and 5) Resilient Overcomers: unemployed minorities in low-quality neighborhoods, overcoming the obstacles of higher health and socio-economic challenges. Groups 3, 4, and 5 had worse survival than group 1 in adjusted analyses (Table). Conclusions: SDOH profiles were strongly associated with survival in US cancer survivors. Findings support the need to identify SDOH profiles in efforts to personalize mitigation strategies and enhance long-term wellness.[Table: see text]

The Economic Burden of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: Living Longer but Poorer?

Treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has benefitted from a proliferation of new medications and devices. These treatments carry important clinical benefits, but also come with costs relevant to payers, providers, and patients. Patient out-of-pocket costs have been implicated in the avoidance of medical care, nonadherence to medications, and the exacerbation of health care disparities. In the absence of major health care policy and payment redesign, high-quality HFrEF care delivery requires transparent integration of cost considerations into system design, patient-clinician interactions, and medical decision making.

Health and economic effects of introducing single-dose or two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination in India

BackgroundCervical cancer is a major public health problem in India, where access to prevention programmes is low. The WHO-Strategic Advisory Group of Experts recently updated their recommendation for human papillomavirus...

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Vaccines for COVID-19 According to Sex, Comorbidity and Socioeconomic Status: A Population Study.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are extremely effective in preventing severe disease, but their real-world cost effectiveness is still an open question. We present an analysis of the cost-effectiveness and economic impact of the initial phase of the COVID-19 vaccination rollout in the Basque Country, Spain. To calculate costs and quality-adjusted life years for the entire population of the Basque Country, dynamic modelling and a real-world data analysis were combined. Data on COVID-19 infection outcomes (cases, hospitalisations, intensive care unit admissions and deaths) and population characteristics (age, sex, socioeconomic status and comorbidity) during the initial phase of the vaccination rollout, from January to June of 2021, were retrieved from the Basque Health Service database. The outcomes in the alternative scenario (without vaccination) were estimated with the dynamic model used to guide public health authority policies, from February to December 2020. Individual comorbidity-adjusted life expectancy and costs were estimated. By averting severe disease-related outcomes, COVID-19 vaccination resulted in monetary savings of €26.44 million for the first semester of 2021. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €707/quality-adjusted life year considering official vaccine prices and dominant real prices. While the analysis by comorbidity showed that vaccines were considerably more cost effective in individuals with pre-existing health conditions, this benefit was lower in the low socioeconomic status group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the vaccination programme justified the policy of prioritising high-comorbidity patients. The initial phase of COVID-19 vaccination was dominant from the perspective of the healthcare payer.

Optimizing delirium care in the era of Age-Friendly Health System.

Delirium is a significant geriatric condition associated with adverse clinical and economic outcomes. The cause of delirium is usually multifactorial, and person-centered multicomponent approaches for proper delirium management are required. In 2017, the John A. Hartford Foundation and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) launched a national initiative, Age-Friendly Health System (AFHS), promoting the use of a framework called 4Ms (what matters, medication, mentation, and mobility). The 4Ms framework's primary goal is to provide comprehensive and practical person-centered care for older adults and it aligns with the core concepts of optimal delirium management. In this special article, we demonstrate how a traditional delirium prevention and management model can be assessed from the perspective of AFHS. An example is the crosswalk with the Hospital Elder Life Program (HELP) Core Interventions and the 4MS, which demonstrates alignment in delirium management. We also introduce useful tools to create an AFHS environment in delirium management. Although much has been written about delirium management, there is a need to identify the critical steps in advancing the overall delirium care in the context of the AFHS. In this article, we suggest future directions, including the need for more prospective and comprehensive research to assess the impact of AFHS on delirium care, the need for more innovative and sustainable education platforms, fundamental changes in the healthcare payment system for proper adoption of AFHS in any healthcare setting, and application of AFHS in the community for continuity of care for older adults with delirium.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis and Impact on Length of Hospital Stay of the Introduction of Remdesivir as a Treatment Option for Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 Requiring Supplemental Oxygen in Greece Versus Standard of Care

PurposeThe COVID-19 pandemic is a global threat with a devastating impact on health, economy, and society in general. The objective of this study was to assess the clinical and economic value of remdesivir by developing a cost-effectiveness analysis model for hospitalized adults with COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen in Greece. MethodsA cost-effectiveness model was developed that included a decision tree model and a Markov cohort model. Clinical effectiveness data for remdesivir were derived from a network meta-analysis. Health care resource use, current clinical practice, and cost data were derived from published literature. Both clinical and cost-effectiveness outcomes were assessed from a Greek health care payer perspective. FindingsTreatment with remdesivir led to 1.45 more life-years and 1.11 quality-adjusted life-years gained compared with standard of care alone. In addition, treatment with remdesivir resulted in fewer days in the hospital per patient (0.87, 1.49, and 1.37 fewer days in the general ward, intensive care unit, and intensive care unit with mechanical invasive ventilation, respectively) than patients treated only with standard of care, as well as with lower hospital bed occupancy rates and fewer deaths. Treatment with remdesivir was also related to cost savings for the Greek health care system, making remdesivir a dominant intervention. ImplicationsThis study provides good evidence for policymakers on the economic value of remdesivir as a treatment strategy for hospitalized patients moderately and severely infected by the virus who require supplemental oxygen. The results support the use of remdesivir as a first-line antiviral treatment option for hospitalized patients in the Greek national COVID-19 treatment algorithm. However, the model does not incorporate estimates on possible additional hospitalizations or rehabilitations, long-term adverse effects of COVID-19, adverse events of remdesivir, or indirect costs of the disease. Therefore, further research is needed to fully evaluate the cost-effectiveness and clinical implications of the use of remdesivir in treating patients with COVID-19 in Greece.

Methods for Economic Evaluations of Novel Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a severe epidemiological and public health concern among the elderly population worldwide, with substantial economic and social burdens. Economic evaluations can play an essential role in optimizing the utilization of scarce resources. In recent years, the number of economic evaluation studies related to AF has increased due to the rising number of AF patients, the continuous updating of clinical data, and the emergence of real-world evidence. However, there are still deficiencies in model settings and parameter sources in relevant studies. This study aims to review the existing economic evaluations of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients with AF and summarize the evidence and methods applied. A comprehensive and systematic search was conducted on electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science (WOS), and The Cochrane Library, from the date of database creation to November 2022. The reporting quality of included literature was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) statement. A total of 102 studies were included in the review, with 200 comparisons between NOACs and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), as well as 58 comparisons between different NOACs. The healthcare sector and payer perspectives were the most common, and accordingly, the majority of the evaluations considered only direct medical costs. Most studies used Markov cohort models with the number of health states ranging from 4 to 29. Of included studies, 80 (78%) considered event recurrence and complications, and 78 (76%) considered discontinuation and second-line therapy. All of the studies applied uncertainty analysis to explore the robustness of the results. Of all 200 NOACs-VKAs comparisons, 149 (75%) showed that NOACs were more cost-effective; this proportion was 84% (139 out of 165) in high-income countries but decreased to 29% (10 out of 35) in middle- and low-income countries. Most (82%) of the 28 items in the CHEERS 2022 checklist were elucidated in the majority of included studies. A minority (only 39%) of included studies demonstrated high reporting quality. NOACs may be more cost-effective than VKAs in patients with AF, but this conclusion applies to high-income countries, whereas VKAs may be more cost-effective in middle- and low-income countries. The reporting quality of included studies was variable, and certain methodological issues were presented. This study highlights the economic evaluation methodology of NOACs in patients with AF and provides recommendations for modeling methods and future studies.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of prophylactic laser peripheral iridotomy for primary angle-closure suspect in Japan

Background/ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of prophylactic laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI) with that of observation for primary angle-closure suspect (PACS) in Japan.Subjects/MethodsA Markov model was developed to compare the costs and utilities of prophylactic LPI with those of observation of 40-year-old patients with PACS. In the model with a yearly cycle over a 20-year time horizon, the disease was postulated to irreversibly progress from PACS to primary angle closure, followed by primary angle-closure glaucoma, unilateral blindness, and bilateral blindness. The parameters were estimated mainly based on a recent randomised controlled trial and analyses of Japanese claims data. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated from the healthcare payer’s perspective and evaluated at the willingness-to-pay 5 million Japanese Yen per quality-adjusted life-year. The observation period and the age at entry into the cohort was changed to account for a variety of clinical courses in sensitivity analyses. We conducted one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis with Monte Carlo simulations with 10 000 iterations.ResultsThe incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of LPI was 2,287,662 Japanese Yen (14,298 pounds sterling) per quality-adjusted life-year, which was below the willingness-to-pay threshold. The ratios were approximately 4 and 8 million in the 15-year and 10-year time horizons, respectively. Increasing the age at entry had little influence on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that the results were robust.ConclusionsOur results indicate that prophylactic LPI for middle-aged patients with PACS is cost-effective in Japan.

Cost-utility of 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine compared to no vaccination and recommended alternative vaccines among Belgian adults

ABSTRACTBackgroundThe Belgian Superior Health Council (SHC) preferentially recommended the 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) for adults aged ≥65 years, immunocompromised patients, and patients aged ≥50 years suffering from conditions that increase their risk for pneumococcal infections. The objective of this paper is to present the cost-utility of PCV20 compared to no vaccination and the alternative sequence of PCV15 followed by the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23) in this population.Research Design and MethodsThe analysis employed a static Markov model capturing lifetime risk of pneumococcal infections, associated disutility, mortality, and costs from different healthcare payer perspectives.ResultsResults indicated use of PCV20 among Belgian older and at-risk adults is highly cost-effective compared to no vaccination, with an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of €4,164. Compared to the sequential regimen (PCV15+PPV23), PCV20 vaccination is a cost-saving strategy. Subgroup analysis indicated PCV20 vaccination of at-risk adults aged 65–84 years would also be cost-saving from the national healthcare perspective.ConclusionBased on current knowledge, this analysis suggests that access to PCV20 should be proposed in all adults recommended for vaccination by the SHC as PCV20 prevents additional hospitalizations and deaths caused by pneumococcal infection at an affordable cost.

Cost-effectiveness of left atrial appendage closure for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: a systematic review appraising the methodological quality

BackgroundThe increasing global prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) has led to a growing demand for stroke prevention strategies, resulting in higher healthcare costs. High-quality economic evaluations of stroke prevention strategies can play a crucial role in maximising efficient allocation of resources. In this systematic review, we assessed the methodological quality of such economic evaluations.MethodsWe searched electronic databases of PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Econ Lit to identify model-based economic evaluations comparing the left atrial appendage closure procedure (LAAC) and oral anticoagulants published in English since 2000. Data on study characteristics, model-based details, and analyses were collected. The methodological quality was evaluated using the modified Economic Evaluations Bias (ECOBIAS) checklist. For each of the 22 biases listed in this checklist, studies were categorised into one of four groups: low risk, partial risk, high risk due to inadequate reporting, or high risk. To gauge the overall quality of each study, we computed a composite score by assigning + 2, 0, − 1 and − 2 to each risk category, respectively.ResultsIn our analysis of 12 studies, majority adopted a healthcare provider or payer perspective and employed Markov Models with the number of health states varying from 6 to 16. Cost-effectiveness results varied across studies. LAAC displayed a probability exceeding 50% of being the cost-effective option in six out of nine evaluations compared to warfarin, six out of eight evaluations when compared to dabigatran, in three out of five evaluations against apixaban, and in two out of three studies compared to rivaroxaban. The methodological quality scores for individual studies ranged from 10 to − 12 out of a possible 24. Most high-risk ratings were due to inadequate reporting, which was prevalent across various biases, including those related to data identification, baseline data, treatment effects, and data incorporation. Cost measurement omission bias and inefficient comparator bias were also common.ConclusionsWhile most studies concluded LAAC to be the cost-effective strategy for stroke prevention in AF, shortcomings in methodological quality raise concerns about reliability and validity of results. Future evaluations, free of these shortcomings, can yield stronger policy evidence.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Pertuzumab for the Treatment of Metastatic HER2+ Breast Cancer in Czechia: A Semi-Markov Model Using Cost States

ObjectivesThis article estimates the cost-effectiveness of adding pertuzumab to the combination of trastuzumab and docetaxel within the first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer with the amplification of HER2+. MethodsData from Czech clinical practice recorded in the BREAST register are used. A semi-Markov model with states derived based on the treatment phases (first-line medication, no medication, next-line medication, death) is defined to estimate costs from the healthcare payers’ perspective. The benefits are estimated as patient survival until death. The Kaplan–Meier estimates are supplemented by the Cox proportional hazard and the accelerated failure time models to control for patient characteristics. Health-related quality-of-life indicators are derived from relevant literature. ResultsBased on the used data, adding pertuzumab does not result in statistically significantly longer survival while inducing higher treatment costs (€163 360 compared with €90 112 per patient in 2018 prices). Statistically longer survival was not supported by the log-rank test (P = .97), the Cox proportional hazard model, or the accelerated failure time model using the Gompertz distribution. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (€87 200) substantially exceeds the willingness to pay for 1 quality-adjusted life-year (€46 500). ConclusionsThis analysis indicates that adding pertuzumab cannot be considered cost-effective in Czechia. However, the observed phenomenon may be attributed to the limited duration of patient follow-up periods at the time of the study’s execution (mean of 20-21 months). Importantly, we find that using states connected to specific treatment phases is appropriate for a retrospective analysis of patient-level clinical data.

Role of AI (Artificial Intelligence) and Machine Learning in Transforming Operations in Healthcare Industry: An Empirical Study

Artificial intelligence (AI) represents a dynamic and disruptive field within computer science, composed to revolutionize the healthcare sector by primarily restructuring medical practices and healthcare delivery. With the production of complex healthcare data, AI is set to play an increasingly prominent role in this industry. Healthcare payers, providers, and institutions in the health sciences have already accepted various forms of AI. It is imperious for healthcare experts to grip the current landscape of Artificial intelligence and Machine Learning technologies and their potential to enhance the effectiveness, safety, and accessibility of healthcare services, ultimately achieving value-based care. The incorporation of artificial intelligence into healthcare offers many advantages, including enhanced patient care, more accurate diagnostics, improved operational efficiency, and cost reductions. A sample of 301 respondents was collected from healthcare industry. The factors that determine the Role of AI (Artificial Intelligence) and Machine Learning in Transforming Operations in Healthcare Industry are Early detection and prediction of disease, Drug development and discovery, Personalized treatment, and Remote monitoring and telemedicine.

Effects of the Million Hearts Model on Myocardial Infarctions, Strokes, and Medicare Spending

The Million Hearts Model paid health care organizations to assess and reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Model effects on long-term outcomes are unknown. To estimate model effects on first-time myocardial infarctions (MIs) and strokes and Medicare spending over a period up to 5 years. This pragmatic cluster-randomized trial ran from 2017 to 2021, with organizations assigned to a model intervention group or standard care control group. Randomized organizations included 516 US-based primary care and specialty practices, health centers, and hospital-based outpatient clinics participating voluntarily. Of these organizations, 342 entered patients into the study population, which included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 40 to 79 years with no previous MI or stroke and with high or medium CVD risk (a 10-year predicted probability of MI or stroke [ie, CVD risk score] ≥15%) in 2017-2018. Organizations agreed to perform guideline-concordant care, including routine CVD risk assessment and cardiovascular care management for high-risk patients. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services paid organizations to calculate CVD risk scores for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. CMS further rewarded organizations for reducing risk among high-risk beneficiaries (CVD risk score ≥30%). Outcomes included first-time CVD events (MIs, strokes, and transient ischemic attacks) identified in Medicare claims, combined first-time CVD events from claims and CVD deaths (coronary heart disease or cerebrovascular disease deaths) identified using the National Death Index, and Medicare Parts A and B spending for CVD events and overall. Outcomes were measured through 2021. High- and medium-risk model intervention beneficiaries (n = 130 578) and standard care control beneficiaries (n = 88 286) were similar in age (median age, 72-73 y), sex (58%-59% men), race (7%-8% Black), and baseline CVD risk score (median, 24%). The probability of a first-time CVD event within 5 years was 0.3 percentage points lower for intervention beneficiaries than control beneficiaries (3.3% relative effect; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.97 [90% CI, 0.93-1.00]; P = .09). The 5-year probability of combined first-time CVD events and CVD deaths was 0.4 percentage points lower in the intervention group (4.2% relative effect; HR, 0.96 [90% CI, 0.93-0.99]; P = .02). Medicare spending for CVD events was similar between the groups (effect estimate, -$1.83 per beneficiary per month [90% CI, -$3.97 to -$0.30]; P = .16), as was overall Medicare spending including model payments (effect estimate, $2.11 per beneficiary per month [90% CI, -$16.66 to $20.89]; P = .85). The Million Hearts Model, which encouraged and paid for CVD risk assessment and reduction, reduced first-time MIs and strokes. Results support guidelines to use risk scores for CVD primary prevention. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04047147.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of biologics for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in Canada

BackgroundDupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab are the three biologics currently approved for use in CRSwNP in Canada. Despite evidence of efficacy, their cost-effectiveness, which is a key factor influencing prescribing patterns, has not yet been compared to each other.MethodsA cost-effectiveness model using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was constructed using a Decision Tree Markov analysis. A third-party healthcare payer perspective and a 10-year time horizon was used. A willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 50,000 Canadian dollars (CAD) per QALY was used to determine cost-effectiveness. Dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab were each compared to each other.ResultsOmalizumab was the most cost-effective biologic using current estimates of cost and efficacy in CRSwNP. Using omalizumab as a baseline, dupilumab had an ICER of $235,305/QALY. Mepolizumab was dominated by omalizumab and dupilumab at the current drug prices and estimates of efficacy. Sensitivity analyses determined that when increasing the WTP threshold to $150,000/QALY, dupilumab became cost-effective compared to omalizumab in 22.5% of simulation scenarios. Additionally, altering dosing frequency had a significant effect on cost-effectiveness.ConclusionWhen comparing the relative cost-effectiveness of biologics in recalcitrant CRSwNP, omalizumab currently appears to be the most cost-effective option. Future reductions in drug prices, adjustments to currently approved dosing regimens, better patient selection, and improvements in sinus surgery outcomes will challenge the current cost-effectiveness models and necessitate reassessment as treatments for CRSwNP continue to evolve.

Attributable Costs of Stroke in Ontario, Canada and Their Variation by Stroke Type and Social Determinants of Health.

Estimates of attributable costs of stroke are scarce, as most prior studies do not account for the baseline health care costs in people at risk of stroke. We estimated the attributable costs of stroke in a universal health care setting and their variation across stroke types and several social determinants of health. We undertook a population-based administrative database-derived matched retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada. Community-dwelling adults aged ≥40 years with a stroke between 2003 and 2018 were matched (1:1) on demographics and comorbidities with controls without stroke. Using a difference-in-differences approach, we estimated the mean 1-year direct health care costs attributable to stroke from a public health care payer perspective, accounting for censoring with a weighted available sample estimator. We described health sector-specific costs and reported variation across stroke type and social determinants of health. The mean 1-year attributable costs of stroke were Canadian dollars 33 522 (95% CI, $33 231-$33 813), with higher costs for intracerebral hemorrhage ($40 244; $39 193-$41 294) than ischemic stroke ($32 547; $32 252-$32 843). Most of these costs were incurred in acute care hospitals ($15 693) and rehabilitation facilities ($7215). Compared with all patients with stroke, the mean attributable costs were higher among immigrants ($40 554; $39 316-$41 793), those aged <65 years ($35 175; $34 533-$35 818), and those residing in low-income neighborhoods ($34 687; $34 054-$35 320) and lower among rural residents ($29 047; $28 362-$29 731). Our findings of high attributable costs of stroke, especially in immigrants, younger patients, and residents of low-income neighborhoods, can be used to evaluate potential health care cost savings associated with different primary stroke prevention strategies.

Factors influencing public and private healthcare utilisation in Uganda.

In Uganda, health care utilisation remains very low despite a number of government reforms that have been implemented in the health sector since the 1990's such as decentralization and removal of user fees in public health facilities among others. To examine the factors influencing public and private health care utilisation in Uganda. The study used cross sectional data from the Uganda National Household Survey collected between July 2016 and June 2017. Anderson's conceptual framework was used to identify explanatory variables associated with choice of health care providers and a multinomial logistic regression model was estimated. Out of the 17,912 individuals who sought care, 36% used a government facility, 60% used private facility while 4% had self- care/treatment. The results show that out of pocket health expenditure, age, level of education, marital status, residence, and type of illness significantly influenced choice of public healthcare providers. Similarly, utilisation of private healthcare providers was associated with household welfare, level of education, residence, marital status, illness days, and type of illness. The findings highlight the need for a national health insurance scheme to reduce out of pocket payments for health care and enable the poor and vulnerable patients visit the modern health facilities.

Cost-effectiveness of left atrial appendage closure with Watchman for non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients in Japan

AimsLeft atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has been demonstrated to be cost-saving relative to oral anticoagulants for stroke prophylaxis in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in the United States and Europe. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of LAAC with the Watchman device relative to warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for stroke risk reduction in NVAF from a Japanese public healthcare payer perspective.MethodsA Markov model was developed with 70-year-old patients using a lifetime time horizon. LAAC clinical inputs were from pooled, 5-year PROTECT AF and PREVAIL trials; warfarin and DOAC inputs were from published meta-analyses. Baseline stroke and bleeding risks were from the SALUTE trial on LAAC. Cost inputs were from the Japanese Medical Data Vision database. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses were performed.ResultsOver the lifetime time horizon, LAAC was less costly than warfarin (savings of JPY 1,878,335, equivalent to US $17,600) and DOACs (savings of JPY 1,198,096, equivalent to US $11,226). LAAC also provided 1.500 more incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) than warfarin and 0.996 more than DOACs. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, LAAC was cost-effective relative to warfarin and DOACs in 99.98% and 99.73% of simulations, respectively. LAAC dominated (had higher cumulative QALYs and was less costly than) warfarin and DOACs in 89.94% and 83.35% of simulations, respectively.ConclusionsOver a lifetime time horizon, LAAC is cost-saving relative to warfarin and DOACs for stroke risk reduction in NVAF patients in Japan and is associated with improved quality-of-life.

Prevalence and patterns of catastrophic spending for antidiabetic medication in 2020.

BACKGROUND: Medication costs for antidiabetic drugs have risen significantly in the United States, causing concerns about the affordability of these essential treatments. OBJECTIVE: To examine out-of-pocket spending for antidiabetic medication and evaluate what proportion of Americans reach catastrophic spending levels during the year. METHODS: This retrospective cohort analysis of nationally representative data from the 2020 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) was analyzed for respondents that reported a diabetes diagnosis. Prescription drug costs were identified from the MEPS Prescribed Medicines File, which included both total prescription payment and out-of-pocket payment for each medication fill. Catastrophic spending thresholds were evaluated based on the World Health Organization's definition, which is spending greater than 40% of a household's nonsubsistence income on health care payments. Statistical analysis was performed with Stata 17 and sample weights were applied adjusting for the MEPS complex survey design to produce national estimates. Descriptive statistics were reported as weighted counts and percentages for categorical variables and as medians with interquartile range for continuous variables. Comparisons of reaching catastrophic spending thresholds across study variables were evaluated with Pearson chi-square tests. A P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant in this study. RESULTS: The study included data from a weighted US population of 29.5 million Americans with diabetes. Among this group, 23.8 million (81%) reported use of a prescription medication to treat diabetes. Total reported out-of-pocket payments paid by the patient for antidiabetic medication surpassed $5.2 billion with the largest portion attributable to the insulin subclass, which accounted for 42% or $2.2 billion. The data suggest an estimated 3 million Americans (10.3%) experienced out-of-pocket spending for antidiabetic drugs that reached catastrophic spending thresholds in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Affordability of prescribed medication in community-dwelling persons with diabetes remains a significant challenge for many Americans.

Health economic analysis of the integrated cognitive assessment tool to aid dementia diagnosis in the United Kingdom.

The aim of this study was to develop a comprehensive economic evaluation of the integrated cognitive assessment (ICA) tool compared with standard cognitive tests when used for dementia screening in primary care and for initial patient triage in memory clinics. ICA was compared with standard of care comprising a mixture of cognitive assessment tools over a lifetime horizon and employing the UK health and social care perspective. The model combined a decision tree to capture the initial outcomes of the cognitive testing with a Markov structure that estimated long-term outcomes of people with dementia. Quality of life outcomes were quantified using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the economic benefits were assessed using net monetary benefit (NMB). Both costs and QALYs were discounted at 3.5% per annum and cost-effectiveness was assessed using a threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained. ICA dominated standard cognitive assessment tools in both the primary care and memory clinic settings. Introduction of the ICA tool was estimated to result in a lifetime cost saving of approximately £123 and £226 per person in primary care and memory clinics, respectively. QALY gains associated with early diagnosis were modest (0.0016 in primary care and 0.0027 in memory clinic). The net monetary benefit (NMB) of ICA introduction was estimated at £154 in primary care and £281 in the memory clinic settings. Introduction of ICA as a tool to screen primary care patients for dementia and perform initial triage in memory clinics could be cost saving to the UK public health and social care payer.