RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Although prophylaxis for ophthalmia neonatorum at birth is required by law in Ontario, declining prevalence of disease and efficacy of prophylaxis have called this practice into question. The objective of this modelling study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of universal prophylaxis for ophthalmia neonatorum to inform decision-makers on the potential impact of a change in this policy. METHODS: We compared the cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis for ophthalmia neonatorum with no prophylaxis through cost-utility analysis with a lifetime time horizon, considering a provincial government payer, for a hypothetical population of newborns in Ontario. We assessed both the mean incremental costs of prophylaxis and its mean incremental effectiveness using a hybrid (part decision tree, part Markov) model. We used a scenario analysis to evaluate alternative time horizons and discount rates. We conducted a threshold analysis to evaluate the impact of variations in the cost of prophylaxis and in the prevalence of sexually transmitted infections (gonorrhea and chlamydia). RESULTS: In our model, prophylaxis for ophthalmia neonatorum did not meet a willingness-to-pay threshold of Can$50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Although prophylaxis was effective in reducing morbidity associated with ophthalmia neonatorum, the number needed to treat to prevent 1 case of ophthalmia neonatorum blindness was 500 000, with an associated cost of more than Can$4 000 000. When compared with no prophylaxis, prophylaxis had an incremental cost of Can$355 798 per long-term QALY gained (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio). INTERPRETATION: We found that prophylaxis for ophthalmia neonatorum, although individually inexpensive, leads to very high costs on a population level. These findings contribute to the discussion on mandatory prophylaxis currently underway in several jurisdictions.
Assuntos
Gonorreia , Oftalmia Neonatal , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Oftalmia Neonatal/epidemiologia , Oftalmia Neonatal/prevenção & controle , Oftalmia Neonatal/tratamento farmacológico , Análise de Custo-Efetividade , Ontário/epidemiologia , Gonorreia/epidemiologia , Gonorreia/prevenção & controle , Análise Custo-BenefícioRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Housing affects an individual's physical and mental health, particularly among people who use substances. Understanding the association between individual characteristics and housing status can inform housing policy and help optimize the care of people who use drugs. The objective of this study was to explore the factors associated with unstable housing among people who use drugs in Ottawa. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis of data from 782 participants in the Participatory Research in Ottawa: Understanding Drugs (PROUD) Study. PROUD is a prospective cohort study of people who use drugs in Ottawa. Between March and December 2013, participants were recruited through peer-based recruitment on the streets and in social services settings and completed a peer-administered questionnaire that explored socio-demographic information, drug use patterns, community integration, experiences with police and incarceration, and access to health care and harm reduction services. Eligibility criteria included age of 16 years or older, self-reported illicit drug use within the past 12 months and having lived in Ottawa for at least 3 months. Housing status was determined by self-report. "Stable housing" was defined as residence in a house or apartment and "unstable housing" was defined as all other residence types. Exploratory multivariable logistic regression analyses of the association between characteristics of people who use drugs and their housing status were conducted. RESULTS: Factors that were associated with unstable housing included: recent incarceration; not having a regular doctor; not having received support from a peer worker; low monthly income; income source other than public disability support payments; and younger age. Gender, language, ethnicity, education level, opioid use and injection drug use were not independently associated with housing status. CONCLUSIONS: People who use drugs face significant barriers to stable housing. These results highlight key areas to address in order to improve housing stability among this community.