Can Generalized Cost-effectiveness Analysis Leverage Meaningful Use of Novel Value Elements in Pharmacoeconomics to Inform Medicare Drug Price Negotiation?

OBJECTIVES: Decision makers considering using cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to inform health-technology assessment must contend with documented and controversial shortfalls of CEA, including its assumption of disease severity independence and static pricing. ISPOR has recently introduced novel value elements besides direct healthcare cost and effectiveness for the patient, and these should be captured in CEA. Although novel value elements advance our understanding of "what" should be measured (value of hope, severity of disease, health equity, etc), there is limited direction on "how" to measure them in conventional CEA. Furthermore, with Medicare empowered to set drug prices under the Inflation Reduction Act, it is not clear what role CEA might have on where prices are set, given objections to the quality-adjusted life year in conventional approaches. METHODS: We critically reviewed the evidence for expanding conventional CEA methods to a more generalized approach of generalized CEA (GCEA). RESULTS: GCEA accounts for methods that address objections to the quality-adjusted life year and incorporate novel value elements. Although GCEA offers advantages, it also requires further research to develop "off-the-shelf" resources to help inform, for example, maximum fair price in the context of Medicare drug price negotiation. CONCLUSIONS: Should a shift toward GCEA reveal that the societal value of novel medicines exceeds their market-based costs, which will raise the key question of what market failure Medicare negotiation is meant to solve, if any, and therefore what the appropriate role of such negotiation might be to maximize the value society might garner from the development of novel medicines.

Dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane to treat venous leg ulcers: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane (DHACM) in Medicare enrolees who developed a venous leg ulcer (VLU). METHOD: This economic evaluation used a four-state Markov model to simulate the disease progression of VLUs for patients receiving advanced treatment (AT) with DHACM or no advanced treatment (NAT) over a three-year time horizon from a US Medicare perspective. DHACM treatments were assessed when following parameters for use (FPFU), whereby applications were initiated 30-45 days after the initial VLU diagnosis claim, and reapplications occurred on a weekly to biweekly basis until completion of the treatment episode. The cohort was modelled on the claims of 530,220 Medicare enrolees who developed a VLU between 2015-2019. Direct medical costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the net monetary benefit (NMB) at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY were applied. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to test the uncertainty of model results. RESULTS: DHACM applied FPFU dominated NAT, yielding a lower per-patient cost of $170 and an increase of 0.010 QALYs over three years. The resulting NMB was $1178 per patient in favour of DHACM FPFU over the same time horizon. The rate of VLU recurrence had a notable impact on model uncertainty. In the PSA, DHACM FPFU was cost-effective in 63.01% of simulations at the $100,000/QALY threshold. CONCLUSION: In this analysis, DHACM FPFU was the dominant strategy compared to NAT, as it was cost-saving and generated a greater number of QALYs over three years from the US Medicare perspective. A companion VLU Medicare outcomes analysis revealed that patients who received AT with a cellular, acellular and matrix-like product (CAMP) compared to patients who received NAT had the best outcomes. Given the added clinical benefits to patients at lower cost, providers should recommend DHACM FPFU to patients with VLU who qualify. Decision-makers for public insurers (e.g., Medicare and Medicaid) and commercial payers should establish preferential formulary placement for reimbursement of DHACM to reduce budget impact and improve the long-term health of their patient populations dealing with these chronic wounds. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: Support for this analysis was provided by MiMedx Group, Inc., US. JLD, and RAF are employees of MiMedx Group, Inc. WHT, BH, PS, BGC and WVP were consultants to MiMedx Group, Inc. VD, AO, MRK, JAN, NW and GAM served on the MiMedx Group, Inc. Advisory Board. MRK and JAN served on a speaker's bureau. WVP declares personal fees and equity holdings from Stage Analytics, US.

The Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol (SPIPP) Checklist 2.0: Content validation.

BACKGROUND: Pressure injury prevention is complex, and rates continue to rise. Checklists reduce human error, improve adherence and standardization with complex processes, focus attention on evidence-based practices derived from clinical practice guidelines and are arranged in a systematic manner to manage the entirety of a patient's risk for preventable outcomes. The original Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol was created to provide a checklist of pressure injury prevention measures but needed revision and validation. PURPOSE: This article describes the revision and content validity testing of the Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol Checklist 2.0 that took place in 2022. METHODS: Using the International 2019 Clinical Practice Guideline as a foundation, items were identified/revised, and expert review of the items was obtained. The Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol 2.0 underwent three rounds of revision by experts from the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel. A panel of eight national experts completed the content validity survey. Individual item content validity index and total scale content validity index were used to summarize the content validity survey scores. RESULTS: The individual item content validity index scores ranged from 0.5 to 1.0. One item (using a mirror to look at heels) was rated as 0.5, three items were 0.75, 20 items were 0.875 and 23 items were 1.0. The item scoring 0.5 was deleted. Those items scoring 0.75 were revised using the content experts' recommendations. The total scale content validity index was 0.93. CONCLUSION: The Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol 2.0 provides a standardized checklist of evidence-based items that operationalize a rigorous clinical practice guideline for the prevention of pressure injuries. Early intervention using a standardized approach and evidence-based checklist that can be integrated into the workflow of the direct-care nurse and provider provides the best opportunity for successful and sustainable pressure injury prevention.

Best-practices for preventing skin injury beneath personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic: A position paper from the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel.

COVID-19 has infected millions of patients and impacted healthcare workers worldwide. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is a key component of protecting frontline clinicians against infection. The benefits of PPE far outweigh the risks, nonetheless, many clinicians are exhibiting skin injury caused by PPE worn incorrectly. These skin injuries, ranging from lesions to open wounds are concerning because they increase the susceptibility of viral infection and transmission to other individuals. Early into the COVID-19 pandemic (April 2020), the U. S. National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel (NPIAP) developed a series of position statements to improve wear-ability of PPE and protect healthcare professionals and their patients as safe from harm as possible under the circumstances. The NPIAP positions, which were formed by conducting a systematic review of what was known at the time, include: (a) Prepare skin before and after wearing PPE with skin sealants, barrier creams and moisturisers; (b) Frequent PPE offloading to relieve pressure and shear applied to skin; (c) treat visible skin injuries immediately caused by PPE to minimise future infection; (d) non-porous dressings may provide additional skin protection, but lack evidence; (e) health systems should take care to educate clinicians about placement and personal hygiene related to handling PPE. Throughout all of these practices, handwashing remains a top priority to handle PPE. These NPIAP positions provided early guidance to reduce the risk of skin injury caused by PPE based on available research regarding PPE injuries, a cautious application of evidence-based recommendations on prevention of device-related pressure injuries in patients and the expert opinion of the NPIAP Board of Directors. Clinicians who adhere to these recommendations reduce the prospects of skin damage and long-term effects (e.g. scarring). These simple steps to minimise the risk of skin injury and reduce the risk of coronavirus infection from PPE can help.

Estimating the value of repositioning timing to streamline pressure injury prevention efforts in nursing homes: A cost-effectiveness analysis of the 'TEAM-UP' clinical trial.

Pressure injury (PrI) prevention guidelines recommend 2-h repositioning intervals in healthcare settings, requiring significant nursing time investment. We analysed the cost-effectiveness of PrI prevention protocols with 2-, 3- and 4-h repositioning intervals in US nursing homes according to 'Turn Everyone and Move for Ulcer Prevention' (TEAM-UP) randomized controlled trial findings. Markov modelling compared 2-, 3- and 4-h repositioning intervals, controlling for other practice guidelines, to prevent PrIs in nursing home residents from a US health sector perspective over one year using TEAM-UP trial data for model structure, sampling and parameterization. Costs, captured in 2020 US dollars, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to derive an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and net monetary benefit (NMB) at $50 000/QALY-$150 000/QALY cost-effectiveness thresholds. Sensitivity analyses tested model uncertainty. Repositioning intervals between 3 and 4 h were cost-effective based on reduced costs at slightly lower QALYs than 2 h at a $50 000/QALY threshold, and the NMB of 4-h repositioning was also more efficient than at 3 h ($9610). Repositioning labour cost and prevention routines were among the most sensitive parameters. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that 3- and 4-h intervals were cost-effective in over 65% of simulations at any cost-effectiveness threshold. Repositioning intervals of 3 to 4 h have potential to reduce nursing time costs without significant decrements in clinical benefits to nursing home residents. Clinical guidelines for PrI prevention should be updated to reflect TEAM-UP clinical and economic findings. Facilities can use cost-savings recuperated from nursing time to deploy to other patient safety priorities without seriously jeopardizing PrI safety.

The clinical and cost effectiveness of remote expert wound nurse consultation for healing of pressure injuries among residential aged care patients: A protocol for a prospective pilot parallel cluster randomised controlled trial.

Pressure injuries affect 1 to 46% of residents in aged care (long term) facilities and cause a substantial economic burden on health care systems. Remote expert wound nurse consultation has the potential to improve pressure injury outcomes; however, the clinical and cost effectiveness of this intervention for healing of pressure injuries in residential aged care require further investigation. We describe the remote expert wound nurse consultation intervention and the method of a prospective, pilot, cluster randomised controlled trial. The primary outcome is number of wounds healed. Secondary outcomes are wound healing rate, time to healing, wound infection, satisfaction, quality of life, cost of treatment and care, hospitalisations, and deaths. Intervention group participants receive the intervention over a 12-week period and all participants are monitored for 24 weeks. A wound imaging and measurement system is used to analyse pressure injury images. A feasibility and fidelity evaluation will be concurrently conducted. The results of the trial will inform the merit of and justification for a future definitive trial to evaluate the clinical and cost effectiveness of remote expert wound nurse consultation for the healing of pressure injuries in residential aged care.

Clinical and cost effectiveness of a system for turning and positioning intensive care unit patients, when compared to usual care turning and positioning devices, for the prevention of hospital-acquired pressure injuries. A randomised controlled trial.

Pressure injuries affect 13.1% to 45.5% of patients in the intensive care unit and lead to pain and discomfort for patients, burden on healthcare providers, and unnecessary cost to the health system. Turning and positioning systems offer improvements on usual care devices, however the evidence of the effectiveness of such systems is still emerging. We conducted an investigator initiated, prospective, single centre, two group, non-blinded, randomised controlled trial to determine the effectiveness of a system for turning and positioning intensive care unit patients, when compared to usual care turning and positioning devices, for preventing PIs. The trial was prematurely discontinued after enrolment of 78 participants due to COVID-19 pandemic related challenges and lower than expected enrolment rate. The study groups were comparable on baseline characteristics and adherence to the interventions was high. Four participants developed a PI (in the sacral, ischial tuberosity or buttock region), n = 2 each in the intervention and control group. Each participant developed one PI. As the trial is underpowered, these findings do not provide an indication of the clinical effectiveness of the interventions. There was no participant drop-out or withdrawal and there were no adverse events, device deficiencies, or adverse device effects identified or reported. The results of our study (in particular those pertaining to enrolment, intervention adherence and safety) provide considerations for future trials that seek to investigate how to prevent PIs among ICU patients.

Value of Triage Treatment Strategies to Distribute Hepatitis C Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents in an Integrated Healthcare System: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of fibrosis-based direct-acting antiviral treatment policies for patients with chronic hepatitis C virus at the Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States health system. METHODS: We used a Markov model to compare the lifetime costs and effects of treating patients with chronic hepatitis C virus at different stages of disease severity, or all stages simultaneously, based on a fibrosis score from the US healthcare sector perspective and societal perspective. The initial distribution of patients across fibrosis scores, the effectiveness of direct-acting antiviral therapy, and follow-up and monitoring protocols were specific to the Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States health system. Direct and indirect costs, transition probabilities, and utilities were derived from the literature. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of our results. RESULTS: The "Treat All" option was dominant from both the societal and healthcare sector perspectives. The conclusion was robust in deterministic sensitivity analysis. The range of incremental costs between the less restrictive policies was small-the difference between the "Treat F1+" and the "Treat All" option was only $111 per person. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed, at both the $100 000/quality-adjusted life-year and $150 000/quality-adjusted life-year thresholds, there was a 70% chance that the "Treat All" option was more cost-effective than the "Treat F1+" option. CONCLUSIONS: We found that expanded treatment access is cost-effective and, in many cases, cost saving. Although our results are primarily applicable to a regional integrated healthcare system, it offers some direction to any healthcare setting faced with resource constraints in the face of highly priced drugs.

A Cost-Utility Analysis of Remote Pulse-Oximetry Monitoring of Patients With COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Since 2020, COVID-19 has infected tens of millions and caused hundreds of thousands of fatalities in the United States. Infection waves lead to increased emergency department utilization and critical care admission for patients with respiratory distress. Although many individuals develop symptoms necessitating a ventilator, some patients with COVID-19 can remain at home to mitigate hospital overcrowding. Remote pulse-oximetry (pulse-ox) monitoring of moderately ill patients with COVID-19 can be used to monitor symptom escalation and trigger hospital visits, as needed. METHODS: We analyzed the cost-utility of remote pulse-ox monitoring using a Markov model with a 3-week time horizon and daily cycles from a US health sector perspective. Costs (US dollar 2020) and outcomes were derived from the University Hospitals' real-world evidence and published literature. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100 000 per QALY. We assessed model uncertainty using univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Model results demonstrated that remote monitoring dominates current standard care, by reducing costs ($11 472 saved) and improving outcomes (0.013 QALYs gained). There were 87% fewer hospitalizations and 77% fewer deaths among patients with access to remote pulse-ox monitoring. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was not sensitive to uncertainty ranges in the model. CONCLUSIONS: Patient with COVID-19 remote pulse-ox monitoring increases the specificity of those requiring follow-up care for escalating symptoms. We recommend remote monitoring adoption across health systems to economically manage COVID-19 volume surges, maintain patients' comfort, reduce community infection spread, and carefully monitor needs of multiple individuals from one location by trained experts.

Suprachoroidal Injection of Triamcinolone Acetonide Injectable Suspension for the Treatment of Macular Edema Associated With Uveitis in the United States: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Suprachoroidal injection of triamcinolone acetonide is the first Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment for macular edema associated with uveitis. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed comparing this treatment with best supportive care (BSC) for the management of this indication from US Medicare and commercial payer perspectives. METHODS: A patient-level simulation was developed per the patient characteristics and changes in best-corrected visual acuity letter scores observed in a phase III study of triamcinolone acetonide (PEACHTREE). The wholesale acquisition cost of triamcinolone acetonide was $1650/injection; suprachoroidal injection cost was assumed at $200/injection. Healthcare costs were informed by a US claims-based analysis. Mortality risk associated with severe vision loss and blindness was modeled by applying a hazard ratio to all-cause mortality rates of the US general population. Health-related quality of life weights, obtained from a regression model fitted to the Visual Function Questionnaire-25 data from PEACHTREE, were applied based on the best-corrected visual acuity scores of both eyes. Costs (2020 US dollar) and benefits were discounted at 3% annually. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated over a 10-year horizon. RESULTS: In the base-case, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing triamcinolone acetonide with BSC was $28 479 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. The wholesale acquisition cost for triamcinolone acetonide for suprachoroidal use was ∼68%, ∼56%, and ∼27% below the willingness-to-pay thresholds of $150 000, $100 000, and $50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, respectively. Results were robust in sensitivity and scenario analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Triamcinolone acetonide for suprachoroidal use is cost-effective compared with BSC for patients with macular edema associated with uveitis.

Machine Learning Methods in Health Economics and Outcomes Research-The PALISADE Checklist: A Good Practices Report of an ISPOR Task Force.

Advances in machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence offer tremendous potential benefits to patients. Predictive analytics using ML are already widely used in healthcare operations and care delivery, but how can ML be used for health economics and outcomes research (HEOR)? To answer this question, ISPOR established an emerging good practices task force for the application of ML in HEOR. The task force identified 5 methodological areas where ML could enhance HEOR: (1) cohort selection, identifying samples with greater specificity with respect to inclusion criteria; (2) identification of independent predictors and covariates of health outcomes; (3) predictive analytics of health outcomes, including those that are high cost or life threatening; (4) causal inference through methods, such as targeted maximum likelihood estimation or double-debiased estimation-helping to produce reliable evidence more quickly; and (5) application of ML to the development of economic models to reduce structural, parameter, and sampling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Overall, ML facilitates HEOR through the meaningful and efficient analysis of big data. Nevertheless, a lack of transparency on how ML methods deliver solutions to feature selection and predictive analytics, especially in unsupervised circumstances, increases risk to providers and other decision makers in using ML results. To examine whether ML offers a useful and transparent solution to healthcare analytics, the task force developed the PALISADE Checklist. It is a guide for balancing the many potential applications of ML with the need for transparency in methods development and findings.

Ideas About Resourcing Health Care in the United States: Can Economic Evaluation Achieve Meaningful Use?

The United States is one of the few high-income countries not to apply economic evaluation routinely to health care decision making on a national level, yet it excels at spending least efficiently on health care. In the interest of continuing to develop new solutions to curb spending on health care and reduce waste in the United States, perhaps now is an important moment to reconsider the benefits of economic evaluation and the barriers that must be overcome to have it emerge as a solution for health care institutions and the patients they serve. This article offers several distinct considerations to make economic evaluation methods (such as cost-effectiveness analysis) an effective component of value-based decision making in the United States. These considerations include overcoming the barriers presented by opportunity costs, spending on health care services versus biomedical technologies, phasing out low-value care, using value of information to prioritize resources, and determining what to do with the quality-adjusted life-year. These issues need to be addressed to achieve a collective purpose for economic evaluation at state and national levels.

Cost-effectiveness of dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane allografts in lower extremity diabetic ulcer treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of using standard care (no advanced treatment, NAT) compared with an advanced treatment (AT), dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane (DHACM), when following parameters for use (FPFU) in treating lower extremity diabetic ulcers (LEDUs). METHOD: We analysed a retrospective cohort of Medicare patients (2015-2019) to generate four propensity-matched cohorts of LEDU episodes. Outcomes for DHACM and NAT, such as amputations, and healthcare utilisation were tracked from claims codes, analysed and used to build a hybrid economic model, combining a one-year decision tree and a four-year Markov model. The budget impact was evaluated in the difference in per member per month spending following completion of the decision tree. Likewise, the cost-effectiveness was analysed before and after the Markov model at a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY). The analysis was conducted from the healthcare sector perspective. RESULTS: There were 10,900,127 patients with a diagnosis of diabetes, of whom 1,213,614 had an LEDU. Propensity-matched Group 1 was generated from the 19,910 episodes that received AT. Only 9.2% of episodes were FPFU and DHACM was identified as the most widely used AT product among Medicare episodes. Propensity-matched Group 4 was limited by the 590 episodes that used DHACM FPFU. Episodes treated with DHACM FPFU had statistically fewer amputations and healthcare utilisation. In year one, DHACM FPFU provided an additional 0.013 QALYs, while saving $3,670 per patient. At a WTP of $100,000 per QALY, the five-year net monetary benefit was $5003. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study showed that DHACM FPFU reduced costs and improved clinical benefits compared with NAT for LEDU Medicare patients. DHACM FPFU provided better clinical outcomes than NAT by reducing major amputations, ED visits, inpatient admissions and readmissions. These clinical gains were achieved at a lower cost, in years 1-5, and were likely to be cost-effective at any WTP threshold. Adoption of best practices identified in this retrospective analysis is expected to generate clinically significant decreases in amputations and hospital utilisation while saving money.

A Multi-Site Thailand Heart Failure Snapshot Study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of heart failure (HF) is increasing in many low-income and middle-income countries, but the limited availability of data on patient profiles and clinical outcomes, particularly at a community level, challenges health service planning. METHODS: The Thai HF Snapshot Study was a multi-site, observational study conducted in Thailand between June 2017 to June 2019. It aimed to document demographic, clinical and sociodemographic characteristics, and to compare clinical outcomes by the level of the hospital. RESULTS: A total of 512 participants were recruited across Thailand: mean age was 64.9±15.3 years and 286 were female (55.9%). The most frequently identified admitting diagnosis was ischaemic heart disease (45.1%). Most patients (70.3%) were classified as New York Heart Association class II at discharge. Patients in university hospitals were frailer (3.2 vs 2.9; p=0.015), had more depressive symptoms (8.1 vs 5.7; p<0.001), and had lower functional status (66.2 vs 73.3; p<0.001) than those in tertiary care. CONCLUSION: Although HF patients admitted to university hospitals had access to advanced technology and health care specialists, clinical outcomes likely affected patient acuity. Interventions are urgently needed to ensure improved HF management considering the social determinants of health in Thailand.

Impact of Adding Pharmacists and Comprehensive Medication Management to a Medical Group's Transition of Care Services.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the impact of pharmacist-provided transition of care (TOC) services on hospital readmissions. METHODS: Starting March 2014, TOC services were provided to all hospitalized patients from an at-risk medical group. Data covering all inpatient and outpatient services and prescription drugs were retrieved for all adult patients discharged between January 2010 and December 2018. The overall impact of TOC was estimated using a generalized estimating equation with logistic regression. Longitudinal TOC effects were estimated using generalized estimating equation in an interrupted time series model. Parallel analyses were conducted using data from an affiliated medical group in a neighboring county without access to the TOC intervention. RESULTS: The study included 13,256 hospital discharges for adult patients for the 30-day readmission analysis and 10,740 discharges for the 180 days analysis. The TOC program reduced 30-day readmission risk by 34.9% [odds ratio (OR)=0.651 (range, 0.590-0.719)] and 180-day readmissions by 33.4% [OR=0.666 (range, 0.604-0.735)]. The interrupted time series results found the 30-day readmission rate to be stable over the pre-TOC period (OR=0.00; not significant) then to decreased by 1.5% per month in the post-TOC period [OR=0.985 (range, 0.980-0.991)]. For 180-day readmissions, risk decreased by 1% per month after TOC implementation [OR=0.990 (range, 0.984-0.996)]. Referral to the medical group's pre-existing Priority Care clinic also reduced readmission risk. Results from the comparison medical group found 180-day readmission declined by 1% per month after March 2014 [OR=0.990 (0.891-1.00)]. CONCLUSIONS: Adding a pharmacist-led TOC program to the medical group's existing outpatient services reduced 30- and 180-day readmissions by "bending the curve" for readmission risk over time.

Cost-effectiveness of a Digital Health Intervention for Acute Myocardial Infarction Recovery.

BACKGROUND: Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a common cause of hospital admissions, readmissions, and mortality worldwide. Digital health interventions (DHIs) that promote self-management, adherence to guideline-directed therapy, and cardiovascular risk reduction may improve health outcomes in this population. The "Corrie" DHI consists of a smartphone application, smartwatch, and wireless blood pressure monitor to support medication tracking, education, vital signs monitoring, and care coordination. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of this DHI plus standard of care in reducing 30-day readmissions among AMI patients in comparison to standard of care alone. METHODS: A Markov model was used to explore cost-effectiveness from the hospital perspective. The time horizon of the analysis was 1 year, with 30-day cycles, using inflation-adjusted cost data with no discount rate. Currencies were quantified in US dollars, and effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The results were interpreted as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at a threshold of $100,000 per QALY. Univariate sensitivity and multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analyses tested model uncertainty. RESULTS: The DHI reduced costs and increased QALYs on average, dominating standard of care in 99.7% of simulations in the probabilistic analysis. Based on the assumption that the DHI costs $2750 per patient, use of the DHI leads to a cost-savings of $7274 per patient compared with standard of care alone. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that this DHI is cost-saving through the reduction of risk for all-cause readmission following AMI. DHIs that promote improved adherence with guideline-based health care can reduce hospital readmissions and associated costs.

Characteristics associated with time-to-treatment initiation for chronic Hepatitis C with new direct acting antivirals.

BACKGROUND: Interferon-free direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) were introduced in 2013 and have transformed the therapeutic landscape for chronic Hepatitis C (HCV). Although treatment is recommended for almost all persons infected with HCV, clinical and psychosocial factors may affect treatment initiation. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States members with prevalent or incident HCV infection identified from November 2013 through May 2016 to identify predictors of DAA initiation. We used Cox regression with time-dependent covariates to compare time to treatment by clinical, demographic and societal factors. RESULTS: Of 2962 patients eligible for DAA therapy, 33% (n = 980) initiated treatment over the study period. The majority of patients (97%) were persistent with therapy and most (95%) tested for sustained virologic response (SVR) achieved cure. We found no effect of race, insurance type or fibrosis stage on treatment initiation. We observed that patients aged 41-60 years (aHR: 2.014, 95% CI: 1.12, 3.60) and 61-80 years (aHR: 2.08, 95% CI: 1.15-3.75) had higher treatment rates compared to younger patients. Incident cases were more likely to be treated than prevalent cases (aHR: 3.05, 95% CI: 2.40-3.89). Patients with a history of substance use disorder (SUD) were less likely (aHR: 0.805, 95% CI: 0.680, 0.953) to be treated. CONCLUSIONS: In the first 3 years of DAA availability, one-third of patients with HCV initiated therapy, and almost all were persistent and achieved cure. While curative, DAAs remain highly priced. Triaging for non-clinical reasons or perceptions about patients will stall our ability to eradicate HCV.

Global digital social learning as a strategy to promote engagement in the era of COVID-19.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To assess formative and summative milestones in a digital course and the reach to low- and middle-income countries of a Massive Open Online Course focussing on supporting nurses dealing with an emerging pandemic. BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has ravaged the globe and increased the need for timely and accurate information from reliable sources. Access to reliable and accurate information, as well as support, is important in achieving health systems strengthening. Using a Massive Open Online Course format, an educational resource aimed at large-scale interactive participation via the Internet, and participants were engaged in a course focussing on nursing in a time of crisis and involved using social learning principles. DESIGN: Observational descriptive study. METHOD: Routinely collected data were collated during the period of 18 May-18 July 2020 focused on both formative and summative milestones in the course. Data were separated and classified by income in accordance with the publicly accessible 2020 World Bank Open Dataset. RESULTS: During the 2-month period of observation (18 May-18 July 2020), 10,130 individuals from 156 countries enrolled in the course. More than 51% of participants were Active Learners. Thirty per cent completed over 90% of the course content by the end. There was widespread distribution of learners in low- and middle-income countries across Asia, Africa and Latin America. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the importance of reliable and valid information sources. The use of Massive Open Online Course format can facilitate dissemination. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: In the context of a dynamic global pandemic, leveraging digital resources to allow access to reliable information and resources is important. Incentivising participation through recognition of learning is important. Engaging in a social learning platform also has the power for reflection, promotion of resilience and capacity for health systems strengthening.

Nursing students' perceived value of the work environment: A discrete choice experiment.

The purpose of this study was to elicit graduating undergraduate nursing students' perceived value of the work environment in aged care. Applying a cross sectional design, an electronic questionnaire was sent to 625 graduating undergraduate nursing students from three schools of nursing in Jiangsu Province, China. A discrete choice experiment questionnaire with eight choice-set questions was performed. In total, 267 nursing students (42.7%) responded to the questionnaire. We found that nursing students valued excellent working conditions the highest (OR = 3.632 [2.846~4.635]), followed by adequate formal professional development activities (OR = 2.252 [1.907~2.660]), good/excellent safety management (OR = 2.214 [1.828~2.682])/ (OR = 2.202 [1.758~2.759]), and 10% higher earnings (OR = 1.615 [1.360~1.919]). Based on these findings, the study provided information to improve the recruitment of nursing students to work with older adults. Findings suggest that students may be 44.07~73.41% more likely to choose working with older people when valued job characteristics are present.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Screening Extremely Low Birth Weight Children for Hepatoblastoma Using Serum Alpha-fetoprotein.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of screening children born at extremely low birth weight (ELBW) for hepatoblastoma using serial serum alpha-fetoprotein measurements. STUDY DESIGN: We created a decision tree to evaluate the cost effectiveness of screening children born at ELBW between 3 and 48 months of age compared with current standard of care (no screening). Our model used discounted lifetime costs and monetary benefits in 2018 US dollars, based on estimates in the published literature. The effects of uncertainty in model parameters were also assessed using univariate sensitivity analyses, in which we changed the values for one parameter at a time to assess the effect on the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: For the estimated 55 699 children born at ELBW in the US each year, this screening is associated with 77.7 additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at a cost of $8.7 million. This results in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of about $112 000/QALY, which is considered cost effective from a US societal perspective. For children diagnosed with hepatoblastoma, our model finds that the screening regimen is associated with a 10.1% increase in survival, a 4.18% increase in expected QALYs, and a $245 184 decrease in expected cost. CONCLUSIONS: Screening ELBW children for hepatoblastoma between 3 and 48 months of age dominates the alternative and is cost effective from a societal perspective.