[The evolution of Brazilian human health policies for the prevention and control of antimicrobial resistance: a scoping reviewEvolución de las políticas de prevención y control de la resistencia a los antimicrobianos desde la perspectiva de la salud humana en Brasil: revisión exploratoria]. / Evolução das políticas brasileiras de saúde humana para prevenção e controle da resistência aos antimicrobianos: revisão de escopo.

Objective: To map the policies related to the prevention and control of antimicrobial resistance from a human health perspective in Brazil and systematize the historical course of these policies. Method: A scoping review was performed following Joana Briggs Institute and PRISMA guidelines. A literature search was performed in December 2020 in the LILACS, PubMed and EMBASE databases. The terms "antimicrobial resistance" AND "Brazil" as well as their synonyms were used. Using the same keywords, Brazilian government websites were searched for documents published until December 2021. Studies of all designs were included, with no language or date restrictions. Clinical documents, reviews and epidemiological studies that did not focus on antimicrobial resistance management policies in Brazil were excluded. Categories based on World Health Organization documents were used for data systematization and analysis. Results: In Brazil, policies related to antimicrobial resistance such as the National Immunization Program and hospital infection control programs can be traced back to before the creation of the Unified Health System. In the late 1990s and 2000s, the first specific policies on antimicrobial resistance (surveillance networks and programs) and education strategies were established; especially noteworthy is The National Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of Antimicrobial Resistance in the Single Health Scope (PAN-BR) of 2018. Conclusions: Despite the long history of policies related to antimicrobial resistance in Brazil, gaps were identified, particularly in monitoring the use of antimicrobials and surveillance of antimicrobial resistance. The PAN-BR, the first government document prepared from a One Health perspective, represents an important milestone.

Objetivo: Determinar qué políticas de prevención y control de la resistencia a los antimicrobianos desde la perspectiva de la salud humana se han adoptado en Brasil y sistematizar su evolución histórica. Método: Se hizo una revisión exploratoria según las directrices del Instituto Joana Briggs y de PRISMA. La búsqueda bibliográfica se realizó en diciembre del 2020 en las bases de datos LILACS, PubMed y EMBASE. Se utilizaron los términos "antimicrobial resistance" AND "Brazil" y sinónimos. Se efectuó una investigación documental con los mismos términos en los sitios web del gobierno brasileño hasta diciembre del 2021. Se incluyeron estudios de todos los diseños, sin restricciones de idioma ni de fecha. Se excluyeron los documentos clínicos, revisiones y estudios epidemiológicos que no hicieran referencia a las políticas de gestión de la resistencia a los antimicrobianos en Brasil. Para la recolección y el análisis de datos se establecieron categorías basadas en documentos de la Organización Mundial de la Salud. Resultados: Desde antes de la creación del Sistema Único de Salud, Brasil tenía políticas de resistencia a los antimicrobianos, como el Programa Nacional de Inmunización y los programas de control de infecciones hospitalarias. A finales de las décadas de 1990 y 2000 se establecieron las primeras políticas específicas de resistencia a los antimicrobianos (redes y programas de vigilancia) y estrategias de educación. Entre ellas se destaca el Plan de Acción Nacional de Prevención y Control de la Resistencia a los Antimicrobianos en el marco del enfoque de "Una salud" (PAN-BR) del 2018. Conclusiones: A pesar de la larga historia de las políticas de resistencia a los antimicrobianos en Brasil, se encontraron lagunas, particularmente en el seguimiento del uso de antimicrobianos y la vigilancia de la resistencia a los mismos. El PAN-BR, primer documento gubernamental elaborado desde la perspectiva de "Una salud", marca un hito en las políticas formuladas en Brasil.

Treatment for human visceral leishmaniasis: a cost-effectiveness analysis for Brazil.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of strategies for the treatment of VL in Brazil. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness study comparing three therapeutic options: meglumine antimoniate (MA), liposomal amphotericin B (LAMB) and a combination of LAMB plus MA (LAMB plus MA), from public health system and societal perspectives. An analytical decision-making model was used to compare strategies for the following outcomes: early therapeutic failure avoided at 30 days, days of hospitalisation avoided and VL cure at 180 days. The efficacy and safety parameters of the drugs came from a randomised, open-label trial and the cost data came from a cost-of-illness study, both carried out in Brazil. RESULTS: For all outcomes analysed, the LAMB strategy was more effective. The MA strategy was inferior to the LAMB plus MA strategy for the outcomes early therapeutic failure avoided and cure. When only LAMB and MA were compared from a societal perspective, a cost of US$ 278.56 was estimated for each additional early therapeutic failure avoided, a cost of US$ 26.88 for each additional day of hospitalisation avoided and a cost of US$ 89.88 for each additional case of cured VL, for the LAMB strategy vs. MA. CONCLUSION: In Brazil, the LAMB strategy proved to be cost-effective for treating VL, considering a GDP per capita as the willingness-to-pay threshold, for all of the outcomes analysed in comparison to MA.

OBJECTIF: Estimer la rentabilité des stratégies de traitement de la leishmaniose viscérale (LV) au Brésil. MÉTHODES: Etude coût-efficacité comparant trois options thérapeutiques: l'antimoniate de méglumine (AM), amphotéricine B liposomale (LAMB) et une combinaison de LAMB et MA (LAMB plus AM), du point de vue du système de santé publique et sociétal. Un modèle décisionnel analytique a été utilisé pour comparer les stratégies pour les résultats suivants: échec thérapeutique précoce évité à 30 jours, jours d'hospitalisation évités et guérison de la LV à 180 jours. Les paramètres d'efficacité et de sécurité des médicaments provenaient d'un essai randomisé ouvert et les données relatives aux coûts, d'une étude sur le coût de la maladie, toutes deux menées au Brésil. RÉSULTATS: Pour tous les résultats analysés, la stratégie LAMB était plus efficace. La stratégie AM était inférieure à la stratégie LAMB plus AM pour les résultats: échec thérapeutique précoce évité et guérison. Lorsque seules les stratégies LAMB et AM ont été comparées d'un point de vue sociétal, un coût de 278,56 USD a été estimé pour chaque échec thérapeutique précoce additionnel évité, un coût de 26,88 USD pour chaque jour d'hospitalisation additionnel évité et un coût de 89,88 USD pour chaque cas additionnel de LV guéri, pour la stratégie LAMB par rapport à AM. CONCLUSION: Au Brésil, la stratégie LAMB s'est avérée rentable pour traiter la LV, considérant un PIB par habitant comme seuil de volonté de payer, pour tous les résultats analysés par rapport à l'AM.

Cost of visceral leishmaniasis care in Brazil.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the Brazilian direct and indirect costs of human visceral leishmaniasis (VL) in 2014. METHODS: Cost-of-illness study on the Brazilian public health system and societal perspective. VL cases registered in the Notifiable Diseases Information System in the year of 2014 were considered. Direct medical costs regarding diagnostic, treatment and care provided to patients with VL were estimated through the top-down approach. The indirect costs related to productivity loss due to premature mortality and morbidity were estimated by means of the human-capital method. RESULTS: In 2014, 9895 suspected cases of VL were reported in the Notifiable Diseases Information System, and 3453 were later confirmed. There were 234 patients with Leishmania-HIV coinfection underwent a secondary prophylaxis. The total cost of VL in Brazil was US$ 14 190 701.50 (US$ 14 189 150.10 to 14 199 940.53) that varied according to the sensitivity analysis. The total of direct medical costs corresponded to US$ 1 873 681.96 (US$1 872 130.55 to 1 882 920.99), and the majority of costs was associated with hospitalisation (40%), followed by treatment (22%), and secondary prophylaxis (18%). Productivity loss corresponded to US$ 11 421 683.37 for premature mortality and US$ 895 336.18 for work absence due to hospitalisation by the illness. CONCLUSIONS: VL represents an expensive health problem for the Brazilian public health system and society, mainly because of its productivity loss due to premature mortality. Interventions to reduce VL lethality could have a great impact on decreasing the cost of illness.