Comparative analysis of financial toxicity between SARS-CoV-2 infection and common comorbidities.

Financial toxicity is common in individuals with COVID-19 and Long COVID. However, the extent of financial toxicity experienced, in comparison to other common comorbidities, is uncertain. Contributing factors exacerbating financial challenges in Long COVID are also unclear. These knowledge gaps are addressed via a cross-sectional analysis utilizing data from the 2022 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), a representative sample drawn from the United States. COVID-19 cases were identified through self-reported positive testing or physician diagnoses. Long COVID was defined as experiencing COVID-19-related symptoms for more than three months. Comorbidity was assessed based on self-reported diagnoses of ten doctor-diagnosed conditions (Yes/No). Financial toxicity was defined as having difficulty paying medical bills, cost-related medication nonadherence, delaying healthcare due to cost, and/or not obtained healthcare due to cost. A total of 27,492 NHIS 2022 respondents were included in our analysis, representing 253 million U.S. adults. In multivariable logistic regression models, adults with Long COVID (excluding respondents with COVID-19 but not Long COVID), showed increased financial toxicity compared to those with other comorbidities, such as epilepsy (OR [95% CI]: 1.69 [1.22, 2.33]), dementia (1.51 [1.01, 2.25]), cancer (1.43 [1.19, 1.71]) or respiratory/cardiovascular conditions (1.18 [1.00, 1.40]/1.23 [1.02, 1.47]). Long COVID-related financial toxicity was associated with female sex, age <65 years, lack of medical insurance, current paid employment, residence region, food insecurity, fatigue, mild to severe depression symptoms experienced during the survey completion, visits to hospital emergency rooms, presence of arthritis, cardiovascular or respiratory conditions, and social activity limitations. In conclusion, American adults with Long COVID, but not those who had prior COVID-19 infection without Long COVID, exhibited a higher prevalence of financial toxicity compared to individuals with common comorbidities. Vulnerable populations were at greater risk for financial toxicity. These findings emphasize the importance of evaluating strategies to reduce economic burden and increase awareness of the effect of Long COVID-related financial toxicity on patient's healthcare and health status.

A longitudinal study on impact of emergency cash transfer payments during the COVID pandemic on coping among Australian young adults.

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has caused financial hardship and psychological distress among young Australians. This study investigates whether the Australian Government's emergency cash transfer payments-specifically welfare expansion for those unemployed prior to the pandemic (known in Australia as the Coronavirus Supplement) and JobKeeper (cash support for those with reduced or stopped employment due to the pandemic)-were associated with individual's level of coping during the coronavirus pandemic among those with and without mental disorders (including anxiety, depression, ADHD and autism). The sample included 902 young adults who participated in all of the last three waves (8, 9C1, 9C2) of the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC), a nationally representative cohort study. Modified Poisson regression models were used to assess the impact of emergency cash transfer payments on 18-22-year-old's self-rated coping level, stratifying the analysis by those with and without mental disorders. All models were adjusted for gender, employment, location, family cohesion, history of smoking, alcohol intake, and COVID-19 test result. Of the 902-person sample analysed, 41.5% (n = 374) reported high levels of coping, 18.9% (n = 171) reported mental disorders, 40.3% (n = 364) received the Coronavirus Supplement and 16.4% (n = 148) received JobKeeper payments. Analysing the total sample demonstrated that participants who received the JobKeeper payment were more likely to have a higher level of coping compared to those who did not receive the JobKeeper payment. Stratified analyses demonstrated that those with pre-existing mental disorder obtained significant benefit from the JobKeeper payment on their level of coping, compared to those who did not receive JobKeeper. In contrast, receipt of the Coronavirus Supplement was not significantly associated with higher level of coping. Among those with no mental health disorder, neither the Coronavirus Supplement nor JobKeeper had a statistically significant impact on level of coping. These findings suggest the positive impacts of cash transfers on level of coping during the pandemic were limited to those with a pre-existing mental disorder who received JobKeeper.

Cost-effectiveness of hospital-based treatment compared with community treatment centres: an analysis of Korea National Health Insurance claims data.

OBJECTIVES: We compared the cost-effectiveness of hospital-based treatment and that of community treatment centres (CTCs). DESIGN: We performed statistical analysis to compare the expenses incurred by COVID-19 patients who received hospital care with those incurred by COVID-19 patients who went to CTCs. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A study was conducted on 411 530 COVID-19 inpatients and 243 329 CTC patients from January 2020 to December 2021. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We calculated the probability of severe disease, hospitalisation period and medical expenses for inpatients and CTC patients. Subsequently, we analysed the cost-effectiveness of CTC compared with hospitalisation. RESULTS: Comparing medical expenses, CTC patients incurred 2 220 000 KRW on average, which is less than the expenses incurred by hospitalised COVID-19 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that using a CTC may be more cost-effective than a hospital service alone.

The COVID-19 Pandemic Led To A Large Decline In Physician Gross Revenue Across All Specialties In 2020.

US health care use declined during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Although utilization is known to have recovered in 2021 and 2022, it is unknown how revenue in 2020-22 varied by physician specialty and practice setting. This study linked medical claims from a large national federation of commercial health plans to physician and practice data to estimate pandemic-associated impacts on physician revenue (defined as payments to eligible physicians) by specialty and practice characteristics. Surgical specialties, emergency medicine, and medical subspecialties each experienced a greater than 9 percent adjusted gross revenue decline in 2020 relative to prepandemic baselines. By 2022, pathology and psychiatry revenue experienced robust recovery, whereas surgical and oncology revenue remained at or below baseline. Revenue recovery in 2022 was greater for physicians practicing in hospital-owned practices and in practices participating in accountable care organizations. Pandemic-associated revenue recovery in 2021 and 2022 varied by specialty and practice type. Given that physician financial instability is associated with health care consolidation and leaving practice, policy makers should closely monitor revenue trends among physicians in specialties or practice settings with sustained gross revenue reductions during the pandemic.

The cost of adding rapid screening for diabetes, hypertension, and COVID-19 to COVID-19 vaccination queues in Johannesburg, South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are responsible for 51% of total mortality in South Africa, with a rising burden of hypertension (HTN) and diabetes mellitus (DM). Incorporating NCDs and COVID-19 screening into mass activities such as COVID-19 vaccination programs could offer significant long-term benefits for early detection interventions. However, there is limited knowledge of the associated costs and resources required. We evaluated the cost of integrating NCD screening and COVID-19 antigen rapid diagnostic testing (Ag-RDT) into a COVID-19 vaccination program. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cost analysis at three public sector primary healthcare clinics and one academic hospital in Johannesburg, South Africa, conducting vaccinations. Participants were assessed for eligibility and recruited during May-Dec 2022. Costs were estimated from the provider perspective using a bottom-up micro-costing approach and reported in 2022 USD. RESULTS: Of the 1,376 enrolled participants, 240 opted in to undergo a COVID-19 Ag-RDT, and none tested positive for COVID-19. 138 (10.1%) had elevated blood pressure, with 96 (70%) having no prior HTN diagnosis. 22 (1.6%) were screen-positive for DM, with 12 (55%) having no prior diagnosis. The median cost per person screened for NCDs was $1.70 (IQR: $1.38-$2.49), respectively. The average provider cost per person found to have elevated blood glucose levels and blood pressure was $157.99 and $25.19, respectively. Finding a potentially new case of DM and HTN was $289.65 and $36.21, respectively. For DM and DM + HTN screen-positive participants, diagnostic tests were the main cost driver, while staff costs were the main cost driver for DM- and HTN screen-negative and HTN screen-positive participants. The median cost per Ag-RDT was $5.95 (IQR: $5.55-$6.25), with costs driven mainly by test kit costs. CONCLUSIONS: We show the cost of finding potentially new cases of DM and HTN in a vaccine queue, which is an essential first step in understanding the feasibility and resource requirements for such initiatives. However, there is a need for comparative economic analyses that include linkage to care and retention data to fully understand this cost and determine whether opportunistic screening should be added to general mass health activities.

Hospital services utilisation and cost before and after COVID-19 hospital treatment: Evidence from Indonesia.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate hospital services utilisation and cost among the Indonesian population enrolled in the National Health Insurance (NHI) program before and after COVID-19 hospital treatment. METHODS: 28,159 Indonesian NHI enrolees treated with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in hospitals between May and August 2020 were compared to 8,995 individuals never diagnosed with COVID-19 in 2020. A difference-in-difference approach is used to contrast the monthly all-cause utilisation rate and total claims of hospital services between these two groups. A period of nine months before and three to six months after hospital treatment were included in the analysis. RESULTS: A substantial short-term increase in hospital services utilisation and cost before and after COVID-19 treatment was observed. Using the fifth month before treatment as the reference period, we observed an increased outpatient visits rate in 1-3 calendar months before and up to 2-4 months after treatment (p<0.001) among the COVID-19 group compared to the comparison group. We also found a higher admissions rate in 1-2 months before and one month after treatment (p<0.001). Consequently, increased hospital costs were observed in 1-3 calendar months before and 1-4 calendar months after the treatment (p<0.001). The elevated hospital resource utilisation was more prominent among individuals older than 40. Overall, no substantial increase in hospital outpatient visits, admissions, and costs beyond four months after and five months before COVID-19 treatment. CONCLUSION: Individuals with COVID-19 who required hospital treatment had considerably higher healthcare resource utilisation in the short-term, before and after the treatment. These findings indicated that the total cost of treating COVID-19 patients might include the pre- and post-acute period.

Financial hardship and cost-related nonadherence to medication in patients with liver disease in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Economic hardship associated with chronic liver disease (CLD) may delay timely access to healthcare. AIM: To estimate the national burden of financial hardship across the spectrum of CLD in the United States (US) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was performed using the 2020-2021 US National Health Interview Survey database. The questionnaire defined financial hardship from medical bills and cost-related nonadherence to medications in patients with CLD. We used weighted survey analysis to obtain the national estimates. RESULTS: While 6.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.7%-7.2%) out of 60,689 US adults (weighted sample: 251 million) reported financial hardship and inability to pay medical bills; 10.6% (95% CI: 8.3%-13.4%), 18.2% (95% CI: 14.5%-22.6%), 22.6% (95% CI: 11.0%-41.0%) with hepatitis, CLD/cirrhosis, and liver cancer experienced an inability to pay their medical bills due to financial hardship, respectively. 19.8% (95% CI: 15.9%-24.5%) and 23.3% (95% CI: 12.5%-39.3%) with CLD/cirrhosis and liver cancer, respectively experienced cost-related nonadherence to medications, compared to a tenth of US adults (10.7%, 95% CI: 10.3%-11.2%). CLD/cirrhosis demonstrated an independent association with financial hardship from medical bills and cost-related nonadherence to medications. Overall, these disparities were more pronounced in individuals aged <65 years old. In addition, over 40% of individuals with CLD/cirrhosis reported difficulties accessing medical care during the COVID-19 pandemic. CLD/cirrhosis showed an independent association with difficulties accessing medical care due to COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Financial hardship from medical bills and cost-related nonadherence to medication can negatively impact individuals with CLD and need further evaluation.

Associations between BMI and hospital resource use in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 in England: a community-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Excess weight is a major risk factor for severe disease after infection with SARS-CoV-2. However, the effect of BMI on COVID-19 hospital resource use has not been fully quantified. This study aimed to identify the association between BMI and hospital resource use for COVID-19 admissions with the intention of informing future national hospital resource allocation. METHODS: In this community-based cohort study, we analysed patient-level data from 57 415 patients admitted to hospital in England with COVID-19 between April 1, 2020, and Dec 31, 2021. Patients who were aged 20-99 years, had been registered with a general practitioner (GP) surgery that contributed to the QResearch database for the whole preceding year (2019) with at least one BMI value measured before April 1, 2020, available in their GP record, and were admitted to hospital for COVID-19 were included. Outcomes of interest were duration of hospital stay, transfer to an intensive care unit (ICU), and duration of ICU stay. Costs of hospitalisation were estimated from these outcomes. Generalised linear and logit models were used to estimate associations between BMI and hospital resource use outcomes. FINDINGS: Patients living with obesity (BMI >30·0 kg/m2) had longer hospital stays relative to patients in the reference BMI group (18·5-25·0 kg/m2; IRR 1·07, 95% CI 1·03-1·10); the reference group had a mean length of stay of 8·82 days (95% CI 8·62-9·01). Patients living with obesity were more likely to be admitted to ICU than the reference group (OR 2·02, 95% CI 1·86-2·19); the reference group had a mean probability of ICU admission of 5·9% (95% CI 5·5-6·3). No association was found between BMI and duration of ICU stay. The mean cost of COVID-19 hospitalisation was £19 877 (SD 17 918) in the reference BMI group. Hospital costs were estimated to be £2736 (95% CI 2224-3248) higher for patients living with obesity. INTERPRETATION: Patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 with a BMI above the healthy range had longer stays, were more likely to be admitted to ICU, and had higher health-care costs associated with hospital treatment of COVID-19 infection as a result. This information can inform national resource allocation to match hospital capacity to areas where BMI profiles indicate higher demand. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of South Africa's COVID-19 vaccination programme.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines were rolled out in South Africa beginning in February 2021. In this study we retrospectively assessed the cost-effectiveness of the vaccination programme in its first two years of implementation. METHOD: We modelled the costs, expressed in 2021 US$, and health outcomes of the COVID-19 vaccination programme compared to a no vaccination programme scenario. The study was conducted from a public payer's perspective over two time-horizons - nine months (February to November 2021) and twenty-four months (February 2021 to January 2023). Health outcomes were estimated from a disease transmission model parameterised with data on COVID-19-related hospitalisations and deaths and were converted to disability adjusted life years (DALYs). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (DSA and PSA) were conducted to assess parameter uncertainty. RESULTS: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated at US$1600 per DALY averted during the first study time horizon. The corresponding ICER for the second study period was estimated at US$1300 per DALY averted. When 85% of all excess deaths during these periods were included in the analysis, ICERs in the first and second study periods were estimated at US$1070 and US$660 per DALY averted, respectively. In the PSA, almost 100% of simulations fell below the estimated opportunity cost-based cost-effectiveness threshold for South Africa (US$2300 DALYs averted). COVID-19 vaccination programme cost per dose had the greatest impact on the ICERs. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that South Africa's COVID-19 vaccination programme represented good value for money in the first two years of rollout.

Deciphering the link between healthcare expenditure, corruption, and COVID-19 mortality.

This paper analyzes the determinants of COVID-19 mortality across over 140 countries in 2020, with a focus on healthcare expenditure and corruption. It finds a positive association between COVID-19 deaths and aging populations, obesity rates, and healthcare expenditure while noting a negative association with rural residency and corruption perception. The study further reveals that mortality is positively associated with aging populations in high-income countries and positively associated with obesity in upper-middle to high-income countries. Mortality is positively associated with healthcare expenditure, which likely reflects a country's preparedness and ability to better track, document, and report COVID-19 deaths. On the other hand, mortality is negatively associated with corruption perception in upper-middle-income countries. Further analyses based on 2021 data reveal COVID-19 deaths are positively associated with the proportion of the population aged 65 and older in low to lower-middle-income countries, with obesity in high-income countries, and with tobacco use across most countries. Interestingly, there is no evidence linking COVID-19 deaths to healthcare expenditure and corruption perception, suggesting a post-2020 convergence in preparedness likely due to proactive pandemic responses, which might have also mitigated corruption's impact. Policy recommendations are proposed to aid the elderly, address obesity, and combat tobacco use.

Long-term health conditions and UK labour market outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Long-term health conditions can affect labour market outcomes. COVID-19 may have increased labour market inequalities, e.g. due to restricted opportunities for clinically vulnerable people. Evaluating COVID-19's impact could help target support. AIM: To quantify the effect of several long-term conditions on UK labour market outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic and compare them to pre-pandemic outcomes. METHODS: The Understanding Society COVID-19 survey collected responses from around 20,000 UK residents in nine waves from April 2020-September 2021. Participants employed in January/February 2020 with a variety of long-term conditions were matched with people without the condition but with similar baseline characteristics. Models estimated probability of employment, hours worked and earnings. We compared these results with results from a two-year pre-pandemic period. We also modelled probability of furlough and home-working frequency during COVID-19. RESULTS: Most conditions (asthma, arthritis, emotional/nervous/psychiatric problems, vascular/pulmonary/liver conditions, epilepsy) were associated with reduced employment probability and/or hours worked during COVID-19, but not pre-pandemic. Furlough was more likely for people with pulmonary conditions. People with arthritis and cancer were slower to return to in-person working. Few effects were seen for earnings. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 had a disproportionate impact on people with long-term conditions' labour market outcomes.

Economic Evaluation of COVID-19 Screening Tests and Surveillance Strategies in Low-Income, Middle-Income, and High-Income Countries: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND Economic evaluation of the testing strategies to control transmission and monitor the severity of COVID-19 after the pandemic is essential. This study aimed to review the economic evaluation of COVID-19 tests and to construct a model with outcomes in terms of cost and test acceptability for surveillance in the post-pandemic period in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries. MATERIAL AND METHODS We performed the systematic review following PRISMA guidelines through MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. We included the relevant studies that reported the economic evaluation of COVID-19 tests for surveillance. Also, we input current probability, sensitivity, and specificity for COVID-19 surveillance in the post-pandemic period. RESULTS A total of 104 articles met the eligibility criteria, and 8 articles were reviewed and assessed for quality. The specificity and sensitivity of COVID-19 screening tests were reported as 80% to 90% and 40% to 90%, respectively. The target population presented a mortality rate between 0.2% and 19.2% in the post-pandemic period. The implementation model of COVID-19 screening tests for surveillance with a cost mean for molecular and antigen tests was US$ 46.64 (min-max US $0.25-$105.39) and US $6.15 (min-max US $2-$10), respectively. CONCLUSIONS For the allocation budget for the COVID-19 surveillance test, it is essential to consider the incidence and mortality of the post-pandemic period in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries. A robust method to evaluate outcomes is needed to prevent increasing COVID-19 incidents earlier.

Disease Burden and Inpatient Management of Children with Acute Respiratory Viral Infections during the Pre-COVID Era in Germany: A Cost-of-Illness Study.

Respiratory viral infections (RVIs) are common reasons for healthcare consultations. The inpatient management of RVIs consumes significant resources. From 2009 to 2014, we assessed the costs of RVI management in 4776 hospitalized children aged 0-18 years participating in a quality improvement program, where all ILI patients underwent virologic testing at the National Reference Centre followed by detailed recording of their clinical course. The direct (medical or non-medical) and indirect costs of inpatient management outside the ICU ('non-ICU') versus management requiring ICU care ('ICU') added up to EUR 2767.14 (non-ICU) vs. EUR 29,941.71 (ICU) for influenza, EUR 2713.14 (non-ICU) vs. EUR 16,951.06 (ICU) for RSV infections, and EUR 2767.33 (non-ICU) vs. EUR 14,394.02 (ICU) for human rhinovirus (hRV) infections, respectively. Non-ICU inpatient costs were similar for all eight RVIs studied: influenza, RSV, hRV, adenovirus (hAdV), metapneumovirus (hMPV), parainfluenza virus (hPIV), bocavirus (hBoV), and seasonal coronavirus (hCoV) infections. ICU costs for influenza, however, exceeded all other RVIs. At the time of the study, influenza was the only RVI with antiviral treatment options available for children, but only 9.8% of influenza patients (non-ICU) and 1.5% of ICU patients with influenza received antivirals; only 2.9% were vaccinated. Future studies should investigate the economic impact of treatment and prevention of influenza, COVID-19, and RSV post vaccine introduction.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on utilization and cost for care of pediatric and young adult ALL.

OBJECTIVE: Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is the most common childhood malignancy and among the most common malignancies in young adults and requires a unique pattern of healthcare utilization including an acute/emergent presentation and an intensive initial 8 months of therapy followed by two years of outpatient treatment. The COVID-19 pandemic caused massive global disruptions in healthcare use and delivery. This report aims to examine the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the presentation, diagnosis and continued management of childhood and young adult ALL in regard to utilization and cost of care among commercially insured individuals in the United States. RESULTS: Utilizing a commercial insurance claims database, 529 pediatric and young adult patients were identified who were diagnosed with ALL between January 2016 and March 2021. New diagnoses were evaluated by era and demographics. Utilization was measured by COVID-related era as number of inpatient and outpatient encounters, inpatient days, and cumulative cost during the initial 8 months of therapy. None of these cost or utilization factors changed significantly during or shortly after the pandemic. These findings reinforce that the necessary care for pediatric and young adult ALL was unwavering despite the massive shifts in the healthcare system caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. This provides a valuable benchmark as we further examine the factors that influence the pandemic's impact on health equity and access to care, especially in vulnerable pediatric and young adult populations. This is the first investigation of the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on utilization and cost of care in pediatric and young adult cancer.

Costs and resource utilization patterns in surgical site infections: a pre-COVID-19 perspective from France, Germany, Spain, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSIs), mainly caused by Staphylococcus aureus, pose a significant economic burden in Europe, leading to increased hospitalization duration, mortality, and treatment costs, particularly with drug-resistant strains such as meticillin-resistant S. aureus. AIM: To conduct a case-control study on the economic impact of S. aureus SSI in adult surgical patients across high-volume centres in France, Germany, Spain, and the UK, aiming to assess the overall and procedure-specific burden across Europe. METHODS: The SALT study is a multinational, retrospective cohort study with a nested case-control analysis focused on S. aureus SSI in Europe. The study included participants from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK who underwent invasive surgery in 2016 and employed a micro-costing approach to evaluate health economic factors, matching S. aureus SSI cases with controls. FINDINGS: In 2016, among 178,904 surgical patients in five European countries, 764 developed S. aureus SSI. Matching 744 cases to controls, the study revealed that S. aureus SSI cases incurred higher immediate hospitalization costs (€8,810), compared to controls (€6,032). Additionally, S. aureus SSI cases exhibited increased costs for readmissions within the first year post surgery (€7,961.6 versus €5,298.6), with significant differences observed. Factors associated with increased surgery-related costs included the cost of hospitalization immediately after surgery, first intensive care unit (ICU) admission within 12 months, and hospital readmission within 12 months, as identified through multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: The higher rates of hospitalization, ICU admissions, and readmissions among S. aureus SSI cases highlight the severity of these infections and their impact on healthcare costs, emphasizing the potential benefits of evidence-based infection control measures and improved patient care to mitigate the economic burden.

Comparison of the out-of-pocket costs of Medicare-funded telepsychiatry and face-to-face consultations: A descriptive study.

OBJECTIVE: Telepsychiatry items in the Australian Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) were expanded following the COVID-19 pandemic. However, their out-of-pocket costs have not been examined. We describe and compare patient out-of-pocket payments for face-to-face and telepsychiatry (videoconferencing and telephone) MBS items for outpatient psychiatric services to understand the differential out-of-pocket cost burden for patients across these modalities. METHODS: out-of-pocket cost information was obtained from the Medical Costs Finder website, which extracted data from Services Australia's Medicare claims data in 2021-2022. Cost information for corresponding face-to-face, video, and telephone MBS items for outpatient psychiatric services was compared, including (1) Median specialist fees; (2) Median out-of-pocket payments; (3) Medicare reimbursement amounts; and (4) Proportions of patients subject to out-of-pocket fees. RESULTS: Medicare reimbursements are identical for all comparable face-to-face and telepsychiatry items. Specialist fees for comparable items varied across face-to-face to telehealth options, with resulting differences in out-of-pocket costs. For video items, higher proportions of patients were not bulk-billed, with greater out-of-pocket costs than face-to-face items. However, the opposite was true for telephone items compared with face-to-face items. CONCLUSIONS: Initial cost analyses of MBS telepsychiatry items indicate that telephone consultations incur the lowest out-of-pocket costs, followed by face-to-face and video consultations.

Costo y porcentaje de gasto en salud por COVID-19 en primer nivel de atención / Cost and percentage of health spending by COVID-19 at the first level of care

Antecedentes. Ante la pandemia de COVID-19 el sistema de salud reasignó recursos económicos para la atención. Objetivo. Determinar el costo de la atención y el porcentaje del gasto en salud por COVID-19 en una unidad de medicina familiar de primer nivel de atención. Metodología. Estudio de costo y porcentaje de gasto en COVID-19 en una unidad de primer nivel de atención. Se identificaron los servicios generales y finales, para construir el costo fijo se utilizó la técnica de tiempos y movimientos, se identificaron el total de partidas presupuestales ejercidas en la unidad médica para cada uno de los servicios, para desagregar el gasto de los servicios generales a los finales se construyeron ponderadores. El costo variable se realizó con la técnica consenso de expertos y microcosteo. El costo promedio se relacionó con la productividad por servicio y con el total de pacientes atendidos por COVID-19, el resultado se relacionó con el presupuesto ejercido de la unidad. Resultados. El costo anual de la atención de COVID-19 en módulo respiratorio fue 158.597,25 dólares americanos, en medicina familiar fue 192.549,36 dólares americanos, el costo total ejercido en el año 2021 para atención de SARS COV 2 en una unidad de primera atención fue 351.146,61 dólares americanos. Esta cantidad representa el 9,6 % del gasto en salud. Conclusión. El costo en atención de COVID-19 y el porcentaje del gasto en salud en primer nivel de atención es elevado (AU)

Background. In the COVID-19 pandemic, the health system reallocated financial resources for care. Objetive. To determine the cost of care and the percentage of health spending due to COVID-19 in a first level care family medicine unit. Metodology. Study of the cost and percentage of spending on COVID-19 in a first-level care unit. The general and final services were identified, to construct the fixed cost, the technique of times and movements was used, the total budget items exercised in the medical unit for each of the services were identified, to disaggregate the expense of general services to the endings were constructed weights. Variable costing was performed using the expert consensus technique and microcosting. The average cost was related to productivity per service and to the total number of patients treated for COVID-19, the result was related to the budget used by the unit. Results. The annual cost of COVID-19 care in the respiratory module was 158.597,25 US dollars, in family medicine it was 192.549,36 US dollars, the total cost incurred in 2021 for SARS COV 2 care in a unit of first attention was 351.146,61 US dollars. This amount represents 9,6% of health spending. Conclusion. The cost of COVID-19 care and the percentage of health spending at the first level of care is high (AU)

Costs of human papillomavirus vaccine delivery in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review.

Vaccines to protect against human papillomavirus (HPV) infection are recommended for all adolescents by the World Health Organization (WHO) and are primarily delivered in school-based settings. This systematic review aims to summarize the available evidence on the cost of HPV vaccine delivery in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This updated evidence is eminent given recent global efforts to revitalize HPV vaccine delivery following the COVID-19 pandemic and can be used to inform planning for program sustainability. We carried out a systematic review of published literature reporting the costs of HPV vaccine delivery in LMICs published between 2005 and 2023. Eligibility criteria were developed using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome (PICO) framework, and studies that reported primary costing data and unit costs of HPV vaccine delivery were included. From the included studies, we extracted data such as phase of HPV vaccine implementation when costing was done, delivery strategy, and unit costs. Unit costs were converted into 2022 US$ for comparability. All included studies underwent critical appraisal using an adapted framework including Consolidated Health Economics Evaluation Reporting Standards criteria, the WHO-led consensus statement on vaccine delivery costing, and other frameworks. Our research identified 226 records, of which 15 met our inclusion criteria. Most studies (64 %) were carried out in African countries and during HPV vaccine pilots or demonstrations (60 %). Vaccine delivery cost ranged from $0.31 to $24.07 per dose for financial costs and $1.48 to $48.70 per dose for economic costs. The critical appraisal showed that most studies did not describe the uncertainty of reported delivery cost. Our systematic review evidence suggests that HPV vaccine delivery costs vary widely depending on country and stage of implementation when costing was done. Areas for further research include costing when programs are beyond the introduction phase and in LMICs outside of Africa.

Same day discharge colon surgery: is it financially worth it?

AIM: Same day discharge (SDD) for colorectal surgery shows increasing promise in the era of enhanced recovery after surgery protocols and minimally invasive surgery. It has become increasingly relevant due to the constraints posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to compare SDD and postoperative day 1 (POD1) discharge to understand the clinical outcomes and financial impact on factors such as cost, charge, revenue, contribution margin and readmission. METHOD: A retrospective review of colectomies was performed at a single institution over a 2-year period (n = 143). Two populations were identified: SDD (n = 51) and POD1 (n = 92). Patients were selected by International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-10 (ICD-10) and Diagnosis Related Grouper (DRG) codes. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference favouring SDD in total hospital cost (p < 0.0001), average direct costs (p < 0.0001) and average charges (p < 0.0016). SDD average hospital costs were $8699 (values in USD throughout) compared with $11 652 for POD 1 (p < 0.0001), and average SDD hospital charges were $85 506 compared with $97 008 for POD1 (p < 0.0016). The net revenue for SDD was $22 319 while for POD1 it was $26 173 (p = 0.14). Upon comparison of contribution margins (SDD $13 620 vs. POD1 $14 522), the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.73). There were no identified statistically significant differences in operating room time, robotic console time, readmission rates or surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS: Amidst the pandemic-related constraints, we found that SDD was associated with lower hospital costs and comparable contribution margins compared with POD1. Additionally, the study was unable to identify any significant difference between operating time, readmissions, and surgical complications when performing SDD.

Cost-effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for high-risk adult outpatients with COVID-19 in Japan.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Nir/Rit) for adult outpatients with COVID-19 from the perspective of a Japanese public healthcare payer. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness simulation was conducted comparing Nir/Rit for the outpatient treatment of high-risk COVID-19 patients to best supportive care (BSC) without antiviral or antibody drugs. The analytical model was divided into two phases: the treatment phase, lasting 35 days from the start of COVID-19 treatment, and the post-treatment phase. Patients who survived the treatment phase were assumed to follow a general population survival curve. Expected costs and expected quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for both BSC and Nir/Rit were calculated for ages 40 to 80 to obtain the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The robustness of the results was evaluated through deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). RESULTS: The ICERs for patients aged 40, 50, 60, 70, and 80 were 18,854,276 Japanese Yen (JPY)/QALY, 8,482,034 JPY/QALY, 4,976,612 JPY/QALY, 2,636,096 JPY/QALY, and 1,597,783 JPY/QALY, respectively. In the deterministic sensitivity analysis, both the mortality risk during the treatment phase and the relative mortality risk with Nir/Rit had a high impact on ICER across all ages. In the PSA, when the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at 5 million JPY/QALY, the probability of the ICER being below the WTP threshold was 0%, 0.2%, 45.4%, 99.9%, and 100% at ages 40, 50, 60, 70, and 80, respectively. CONCLUSION: Nir/Rit is cost-effective for older individuals aged 60 and over but not for younger age groups.