Economic evaluation of the use of point-of-care devices in patients with long term oral anticoagulation.

To examine the cost and cost-effectiveness of the use of point-of-care (POC) devices by the general practitioner (GP), in anticoagulation clinic or by the patient in self-testing (PST) and self-management (PSM), compared with standard laboratory testing to realize international normalized ratio tests for patients on long term anticoagulation therapy. An economic evaluation was performed from the Belgian health care payer's perspective using a Markov model. Outcomes data were derived from a meta-analysis and cost data were derived from claims databases. Several scenarios were tested based on number of tests and GP's contacts and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to handle uncertainty. Evidence on the impact of POC on mortality was only found for PSM. Therefore, a cost-effectiveness analysis was performed for PSM and for other strategies, only a cost comparison was done. With an unchanged number of tests, POC is cost-saving compared to laboratory testing (probability > 70%). In scenarios where POC induces more tests, results were different: with 52 tests/year, only PSM kept a probability of remaining cost-saving superior to 50%. Except in the case of 100% of GP consultations maintained and 52 tests/year performed, PSM resulted in significantly more "life years gained" (LYG) than usual care and was on average cost-saving. The organisation of long term oral anticoagulation monitoring should be directed towards PSM and, to a lesser extent, PST for selected and trained patients.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung cancer: how much does it really cost?

INTRODUCTION: Despite the lack of randomized evidence, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is being accepted as superior to conventional radiotherapy for patients with T1-2N0 non-small-cell lung cancer in the periphery of the lung and unfit or unwilling to undergo surgery. To introduce SBRT in a system of coverage with evidence development, a correct financing had to be determined. METHODS: A time-driven activity-based costing model for radiotherapy was developed. Resource cost calculation of all radiotherapy treatments, standard and innovative, was conducted in 10 Belgian radiotherapy centers in the second half of 2012. RESULTS: The average cost of lung SBRT across the 10 centers (6221&OV0556;) is in the range of the average costs of standard fractionated 3D-conformal radiotherapy (5919&OV0556;) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (7379&OV0556;) for lung cancer. Hypofractionated 3D-conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy schemes are less costly (3993&OV0556; respectively 4730&OV0556;). The SBRT cost increases with the number of fractions and is highly dependent of personnel and equipment use. SBRT cost varies more by centre than conventional radiotherapy cost, reflecting different technologies, stages in the learning curve and a lack of clear guidance in this field. CONCLUSIONS: Time-driven activity-based costing of radiotherapy is feasible in a multicentre setup, resulting in real-life resource costs that can form the basis for correct reimbursement schemes, supporting an early yet controlled introduction of innovative radiotherapy techniques in clinical practice.

Cost-effectiveness of cardiac resynchronisation therapy for patients with moderate-to-severe heart failure: a lifetime Markov model.

Objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) both with CRT-P (biventricular pacemaker only) and with CRT-D (biventricular pacemaker with defibrillator) in patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III/IV from a Belgian healthcare-payer perspective. Methods A lifetime Markov model was designed to calculate the cost-utility of both interventions. In the reference case, the treatment effect was based on the Comparison of Medical Therapy, Pacing and Defibrillation in Heart Failure trial. Costs were based on real-world data. Pharmacoeconomic guidelines were applied, including probabilistic modelling and sensitivity analyses. Results Compared with optimal medical treatment, on average 1.31 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) are gained with CRT-P at an additional cost of €14 700, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of about €11 200/QALY. As compared with CRT-P, CRT-D treatment adds on average an additional 0.55 QALYs at an extra cost of €30 900 resulting in an ICER of €57 000/QALY. This result was very sensitive to the incremental clinical benefit of the defibrillator function on top of CRT. Conclusions Based on efficiency arguments, CRT-P can be recommended for NYHA class III and IV patients if there is a willingness to pay more than €11 000/QALY. Even though CRT-D may offer a survival benefit over CRT-P, the incremental clinical benefit appears to be too marginal to warrant a threefold-higher device price for CRT-D. Further clinical research should focus on the added value of CRT-D over CRT-P.