RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Reaching the UN General Assembly High-Level Meeting on Tuberculosis target of providing tuberculosis preventive treatment to at least 30 million people by 2022, including 4 million children under the age of 5 years and 20 million other household contacts, will require major efforts to strengthen health systems. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a health systems intervention to strengthen management for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in household contacts of confirmed tuberculosis cases. METHODS: ACT4 was a cluster-randomised, open-label trial involving 24 health facilities in Benin, Canada, Ghana, Indonesia, and Vietnam randomly assigned to either a three-phase intervention (LTBI programme evaluation, local decision making, and strengthening activities) or control (standard LTBI care). Tuberculin and isoniazid were provided to control and intervention sites if not routinely available. Randomisation was stratified by country and restricted to ensure balance of index patients with tuberculosis by arm and country. The primary outcome was the number of household contacts who initiated tuberculosis preventive treatment at each health facility within 4 months of the diagnosis of the index case, recorded in the first or last 6 months of our 20-month study. To ease interpretation, this number was standardised per 100 newly diagnosed index patients with tuberculosis. Analysis was by intention to treat. Masking of staff at the coordinating centre and sites was not possible; however, those analysing data were masked to assignment of intervention or control. An economic analysis of the intervention was done in parallel with the trial. ACT4 is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02810678. FINDINGS: The study was done between Aug 1, 2016, and March 31, 2019. During the first 6 months of the study the crude overall proportion of household contacts initiating tuberculosis preventive treatment out of those eligible at intervention sites was 0·21. After the implementation of programme strengthening activities, the proportion initiating tuberculosis preventive treatment increased to 0·35. Overall, the number of household contacts initiating tuberculosis preventive treatment per 100 index patients with tuberculosis increased between study phases in intervention sites (adjusted rate difference 60, 95% CI 4 to 116), while control sites showed no statistically significant change (-12, -33 to 10). There was a difference in rate differences of 72 (95% CI 10 to 134) contacts per 100 index patients with tuberculosis initiating preventive treatment associated with the intervention. The total cost for the intervention, plus LTBI clinical care per additional contact initiating treatment was estimated to be CA$1348 (range 724 to 9708). INTERPRETATION: A strategy of standardised evaluation, local decision making, and implementation of health systems strengthening activities can provide a mechanism for scale-up of tuberculosis prevention, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
Assuntos
Atenção à Saúde/economia , Atenção à Saúde/organização & administração , Tuberculose Latente/prevenção & controle , Canadá/epidemiologia , Busca de Comunicante , Análise Custo-Benefício , Características da Família , Saúde Global/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Tuberculose Latente/diagnóstico , Tuberculose Latente/epidemiologia , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de SaúdeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Four months of rifampin treatment for latent tuberculosis infection is safer, has superior treatment completion rates, and is as effective as 9 months of isoniazid. However, daily medication costs are higher for a 4-month rifampin regimen than a 9-month isoniazid regimen. OBJECTIVE: To compare health care use and associated costs of 4 months of rifampin and 9 months of isoniazid. DESIGN: Health system cost comparison using all health care activities recorded during 2 randomized clinical trials. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00931736 and NCT00170209). SETTING: High-income countries (Australia, Canada, Saudi Arabia, and South Korea), middle-income countries (Brazil and Indonesia), and African countries (Benin, Ghana, and Guinea). PARTICIPANTS: Adults and children with clinical or epidemiologic factors associated with increased risk for developing tuberculosis that warranted treatment for latent tuberculosis infection. MEASUREMENTS: Health system costs per participant. RESULTS: A total of 6012 adults and 829 children were included. In both adults and children, greater health system use and higher costs were observed with 9 months of isoniazid than with 4 months of rifampin. In adults, the ratios of costs of 4 months of rifampin versus 9 months of isoniazid were 0.76 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.82) in high-income countries, 0.90 (CI, 0.85 to 0.96) in middle-income countries, and 0.80 (CI, 0.78 to 0.81) in African countries. Similar findings were observed in the pediatric population. LIMITATION: Costs may have been overestimated because the trial protocol required a minimum number of follow-up visits, although fewer than recommended by many authoritative guidelines. CONCLUSION: A 4-month rifampin regimen was safer and less expensive than 9 months of isoniazid in all settings. This regimen could be adopted by tuberculosis programs in many countries as first-line therapy for latent tuberculosis infection. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
Assuntos
Antituberculosos/uso terapêutico , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde , Isoniazida/uso terapêutico , Tuberculose Latente/economia , Rifampina/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Antituberculosos/economia , Criança , Custos e Análise de Custo/economia , Países Desenvolvidos/economia , Países em Desenvolvimento/economia , Esquema de Medicação , Feminino , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Isoniazida/administração & dosagem , Isoniazida/economia , Tuberculose Latente/tratamento farmacológico , Masculino , Rifampina/administração & dosagem , Rifampina/economiaRESUMO
AIM: To study costs of laparoscopic and open liver and pancreatic resections, all the compiled data from available observational studies were systematically reviewed. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed using the Medline, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane databases to identify all studies published up to 2013 that compared laparoscopic and open liver [laparoscopic hepatic resection (LLR) vs open liver resection (OLR)] and pancreatic [laparoscopic pancreatic resection (LPR) vs open pancreatic resection] resection. The last search was conducted on October 30, 2013. RESULTS: Four studies reported that LLR was associated with lower ward stay cost than OLR (2972 USD vs 5291 USD). The costs related to equipment (3345 USD vs 2207 USD) and theatre (14538 vs 11406) were reported higher for LLR. The total cost was lower in patients managed by LLR (19269 USD) compared to OLR (23419 USD). Four studies reported that LPR was associated with lower ward stay cost than OLR (6755 vs 9826 USD). The costs related to equipment (2496 USD vs 1630 USD) and theatre (5563 vs 4444) were reported higher for LPR. The total cost was lower in the LPR (8825 USD) compared to OLR (13380 USD). CONCLUSION: This systematic review support the economic advantage of laparoscopic over open approach to liver and pancreatic resection.
Assuntos
Hepatectomia/economia , Custos Hospitalares , Laparoscopia/economia , Pancreatectomia/economia , Redução de Custos , Análise Custo-Benefício , Hepatectomia/métodos , Humanos , Laparoscopia/métodos , Pancreatectomia/métodos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
This paper develops and implements the Conflict-based Assessment of Pedestrian Safety (CAPS) methodology for evaluating pedestrian accessibility at complex intersections. In past years, a significant research has been done on pedestrian access to modern roundabouts and other complex intersection forms, including a significant focus on the accessibility for pedestrians who are blind. A majority of these studies have relied on actual street crossings by study participants under supervision of trained Orientation and Mobility (O&M) Specialist. These crossing studies were used to evaluate risk from a measurement of intervention events, where the O&M specialist had to physically stop the participant from crossing. While providing arguably the most accurate data for the crossing risk at a particular intersection, actual street crossings can be dangerous to the study participants, and are further very time consuming and expensive to conduct. The CAPS method presented in this paper emphasizes the use of conflict-based safety factors to quantify risk. The CAPS method relates pedestrian crossing decisions to advanced measurements of vehicle dynamics to estimate lane-by-lane conflicts. CAPS identifies the grade of conflict based on a score generated on a five-criterion rating scale. Each of these criteria or factors has different severity levels, and when combined, provides an overall risk rating of the crossing decision. The CAPS framework was applied to a study of blind pedestrian crossings at a multi-lane roundabout. The resulting risk scores were calibrated from actual O&M interventions observed during the study to give confidence in the CAPS performance. The calibrated CAPS framework correctly matched all (high risk) O&M intervention events, and further identifies other (lower risk) pedestrian-vehicle conflicts. The resulting method has the potential to allow for a faster and most importantly safer evaluation of complex intersections for pedestrian access. Since all factors are measured prior to the pedestrian stepping into the roadway, this approach is compatible with crossing indicator studies, where the participants merely indicate when they would cross, rather than actually stepping into the roadway. The CAPS framework therefore allows for a more objective and consistent safety assessment of pedestrian crossings in a research context without having pedestrians physically step into the roadway.
RESUMO
RATIONALE: Treatment for latent tuberculosis infection with isoniazid for 9 months (9INH) has poor completion and serious adverse events, while treatment for 4 months with daily rifampin (4RIF) has significantly higher completion and fewer adverse events. OBJECTIVES: To compare the health system costs of 4RIF and 9INH. METHODS: In a randomised trial conducted in five Canadian centres, one Brazilian and one Saudi Arabian centre, consenting subjects were randomised to receive 4RIF or 9INH. Health system costs were estimated from healthcare utilisation including scheduled and unscheduled visits, investigations and drugs. All activities for all subjects were evaluated using financial information from 2007 from the Montreal Chest Institute. Costs were expressed in Canadian dollars. RESULTS: Total health system cost per patient allocated to 4RIF was $854 compared with $970 for 9INH (p<0.0001). The average cost per patient for the 328 of 420 (78%) who completed 4RIF therapy was $1094 compared with $1625 for the 254 of 427 (60%) completing 9INH (p<0.0001). Costs were modestly increased in patients with minor intolerance and substantially increased if the treating physician stopped treatment because of possible adverse events. Total costs related to management of adverse events with 9INH were $48 142 compared with $25 684 for 4RIF (p=0.008). Using these data, incremental cost-effectiveness analyses showed that 4RIF would be cost saving and prevent more cases within 2 years if efficacy exceeded 74%, and cost saving if efficacy exceeded 65%. CONCLUSIONS: The 4RIF regimen was significantly cheaper per patient completing treatment because of better completion and fewer adverse events.