Public Preference for Financing Preventive Vaccines in Health Shocks: The Case of COVID-19 Vaccines in a Middle-Income Country.

BACKGROUND: To effectively manage health crises such as disease pandemics, health authorities require reliable information regarding people's preferences. This helps to ensure timely and targeted interventions and avoids increasing societal costs through developing evidence-based policies. This study investigates the Iranian people's preference for financing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and the factors affecting this. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was performed during the third-wave peak of COVID-19 in Iran from 1 to 20 February 2021 utilizing various data collection methods. The public preference regarding imported and domestically produced vaccines, their willingness to fully or partially contribute to the financing of these vaccines, and their willingness to pay (WTP) for domestically produced vaccines using the contingent valuation method was assessed in different scenarios. The determinants of the probability of positive financing preferences were evaluated using an ordered probit regression model. RESULTS: Among the 2071 survey respondents, approximately 60% stated willingness to contribute to vaccine financing in the form of partial or full user fee payments. Forty percent of respondents are willing to be vaccinated if it is provided for free by the government. Interestingly, people's preference for financing the vaccine was not related to the type of vaccine. The regression analysis showed that income, having supplementary insurance, being male, perceived COVID-19 risk, education, and working in the health sector are significantly related to a higher probability of contribution to vaccine financing. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of country of origin of COVID-19 vaccines, vaccination is very important for the Iranian people, and the majority of respondents in our study showed an inclination to contribute to vaccine funding, from partial to full user fees, to achieve higher protection against COVID-19 disease. Hence, ensuring timely access to vaccines during health crises such as pandemics is imperative, as it saves lives and reduces the economic burden of disease. This commitment from the health system can be supported by financial contributions from the general public. In this regard, considering public preferences is strongly advised to policymakers.

A cost-benefit analysis of mass prostate cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) causes a substantial health and financial burden worldwide, underscoring the need for efficient mass screening approaches. This study attempts to evaluate the Net Cost-Benefit Index (NCBI) of PCa screening in Iran to offer insights for informed decision-making and resource allocation. METHOD: The Net Cost-Benefit Index (NCBI) was calculated for four age groups (40 years and above) using a decision-analysis model. Two screening strategies, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) solely and PSA with Digital Rectal Examination (DRE), were evaluated from the health system perspective. A retrospective assessment of 1402 prostate cancer (PCa) patients' profiles were conducted, and direct medical and non-medical costs were calculated based on the 2021 official tariff rates, patient records, and interviews. The monetary value of mass screening was determined through Willingness to Pay (WTP) assessments, which served as a measure for the benefit aspect. RESULT: The combined PSA and DRE strategy of screening is cost-effective, yields up to $3 saving in costs per case and emerges as the dominant strategy over PSA alone. Screening for men aged 70 and above does not meet economic justification, indicated by a negative Net Cost-Benefit Index (NCBI). The 40-49 age group exhibits the highest net benefit, $13.81 based on basic information and $13.54 based on comprehensive information. Sensitivity analysis strongly supports the cost-effectiveness of the combined screening approach. CONCLUSION: This study advocates prostate cancer screening with PSA and DRE, is economically justified for men aged 40-69. The results of the study recommend that policymakers prioritize resource allocation for PCa screening programs based on age and budget constraints. Men's willingness to pay, especially for the 40-49 age group which had the highest net benefit, leverages their financial participation in screening services. Additionally, screening services for other age groups, such as 50-54 or 55-59, can be provided either for free or at a reduced cost.

A cost-benefit analysis of genetic screening test for breast cancer in Iran.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of the population- and family history (FH) -based screening for BReast CAncer (BRCA) in Iran, a country where less than 10% of breast cancer cases are attributable to a gene mutation. METHODS: This was an economic evaluation study. The Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) for genetic screening test strategies in Iranian women older than 30 was calculated. To this end, the monetary value of the test was estimated using the willingness-to-pay (WTP) approach using the contingent valuation method (CVM) by payment card. From a healthcare perspective, direct medical and non-medical costs were considered and a decision model for the strategies was developed to simulate the costs. A one-way sensitivity analysis assessed the robustness of the analysis. The data were analyzed using Excel 2010. RESULTS: 660 women were included for estimating WTP and 2,176,919 women were considered in the costing model. The cost per genetic screening test for population- and FH-based strategies was $167 and $8, respectively. The monetary value of a genetic screening test was $20 and it was $27 for women with a family history or gene mutation in breast cancer. The BCR for population-based and FH-based screening strategies was 0.12 and 3.37, respectively. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. CONCLUSIONS: This study recommends the implementation of a FH-based strategy instead of a population-based genetic screening strategy in Iran, although a cascade genetic screening test strategy should be evaluated in future studies.

Evaluating the affordability of asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and cystic fibrosis medicines in a middle-income country.

BACKGROUND: A heavy financial burden is imposed on patients suffering from chronic diseases due to medicine out-of-pocket payments. OBJECTIVES: This study focuses on assessing the affordability of medications used for chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and cystic fibrosis (CF) in Iran, specifically on the category R medicines listed in the 2017 Iran drug list (IDL) that are used for the treatment of these diseases, based on the anatomical therapeutic chemical (ATC) drug code. METHODS: The affordability of medicines in mono and combination therapy approaches was assessed in CRDs using the World Health Organization/Health Action International (WHO/HAI) methodology. Accordingly, if out-of-pocket payment for 30-days of pharmacotherapy exceeds one day for the lowest-paid unskilled government worker (LPGW), it's considered non-affordable. RESULTS: Based on the monotherapy approach, our finding demonstrates that all generic medicines of category R were affordable. However, branded drugs such as Symbicort®, Pulmicort Respules®, Flusalmex®, Seretide®, Fluticort Plus®, Seroflo®, and Salmeflo® cost between 1.2 and 2.5 days' wage of LPGW and considered unaffordable despite 70% insurance coverage. Moreover, based on the affordability ratio in the combination therapy approach, all medicines used in asthma, COPD, and CF patients with mild respiratory problems are affordable except omalizumab (inj), which is non-affordable due to its high price and no insurance coverage. CONCLUSION: Results showed that the existing insurance coverage does not protect households from hardship, so more considerations are needed such as different insurance schedules and patient support programs.

Economic evaluations of interventions to prevent and control health-care-associated infections: a systematic review.

Almost 9 million health-care-associated infections have been estimated to occur each year in European hospitals and long-term care facilities, and these lead to an increase in morbidity, mortality, bed occupancy, and duration of hospital stay. The aim of this systematic review was to review the cost-effectiveness of interventions to limit the spread of health-care-associated infections), framed by WHO infection prevention and control core components. The Embase, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment, Cinahl, Scopus, Pediatric Economic Database Evaluation, and Global Index Medicus databases, plus grey literature were searched for studies between Jan 1, 2009, and Aug 10, 2022. Studies were included if they reported interventions including hand hygiene, personal protective equipment, national-level or facility-level infection prevention and control programmes, education and training programmes, environmental cleaning, and surveillance. The British Medical Journal checklist was used to assess the quality of economic evaluations. 67 studies were included in the review. 25 studies evaluated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus outcomes. 31 studies evaluated screening strategies. The assessed studies that met the minimum quality criteria consisted of economic models. There was some evidence that hand hygiene, environmental cleaning, surveillance, and multimodal interventions were cost-effective. There were few or no studies investigating education and training, personal protective equipment or monitoring, and evaluation of interventions. This Review provides a map of cost-effectiveness data, so that policy makers and researchers can identify the relevant data and then assess the quality and generalisability for their setting.

Cost-utility analysis and net monetary benefit of Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP), intra-articular injections in compared to Plasma Rich in Growth Factors (PRGF), Hyaluronic Acid (HA) and ozone in knee osteoarthritis in Iran.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP), Plasma Rich in Growth Factors (PRGF), Hyaluronic Acid (HA) and ozone as effective treatment approaches in knee osteoarthritis management from Iran Health care perspective. METHODS: A decision tree model was conducted to assess the cost-effectiveness of four common intra-articular treatment approaches in patients with mild and moderate knee osteoarthritis. The data on clinical effectiveness was obtained from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted in Iran and used to estimate utility values. The direct medical costs were estimated according to tariffs for public medical centers and hospitals, approved by the Iran Ministry of Health and Medical Education in 2021. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and the net monetary benefit (NMB) were used to evaluate the cost-utility analysis. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses are performed to investigate the robustness of the results and account for the different sources of uncertainty. RESULTS: In this study, HA intra-articular injection-related costs ($581.67/patient) were defined as the highest cost, followed by PRGF ($328.10/patient), PRP (318.58/patient), and Ozone (103.20/patient). According to the utility value, PRP and PRGF (0.68) have the same and the most utility among Intra-articular injections in knee osteoarthritis management. However, the PRP injection method was identified as the most cost-effective intervention due to its high NMB and ICER estimates. Based on the Monte Carlo Simulation, PR intervention, compared to other ones, was introduced as the dominant strategy regarding knee OA management, with a WTP of $10,000 for 100% of cases. CONCLUSION: The study result demonstrated that intra-articular injection of PRP, compare to other injections, is a cost-effective treatment option for patients with mild and moderate knee osteoarthritis. In addition, intra-articular injection of PRP was identified as the best injection, with the highest level of net monetary benefit, for knee OA management.

Budget impact analysis of breast cancer medications: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer globally among women, with 2,261,419 new cases in 2020; systemic treatment may be neo-adjuvant, adjuvant, or both. BC subtype guides the standard systemic therapy administered, which consists of endocrine therapy for all HR + tumors, trastuzumab-based HER2-directed antibody therapy plus chemotherapy for all HER2 + tumors (with endocrine therapy given in addition, if concurrent HR positivity), and chemotherapy alone for the triple-negative subtype. This study aimed to identify, evaluate, and systematically review all budget impact analyses (BIAs) of BC medications worldwide. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection databases were thoroughly searched up to 26th March 2022 to identify original published studies which evaluate BIA of BC medications. ISPOR Task Force guidelines were used to assess the quality of included studies. This study was conducted and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: In total, 17 BIAs were included in the study. About half of the studies were conducted in Europe. The results of the BIAs showed that most of the included BIAs are conducted from the payer's perspective; they have different methodological frameworks for recommended chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy agents to treat BC. For the same medications, the results of budgetary effects are not consistent in diverse countries. Nine out of the 17 studies were focused on trastuzumab, in which the biosimilar form reduced costs, but the brand form increased costs, especially in a 52-week treatment period. CONCLUSION: Researchers should conduct the budget impact analysis of high-value medications such as anti-tumor drugs more objectively, and the accuracy of parameters needs to be more strictly guaranteed. Furthermore, it is worthy of declaring that the budgetary impact of the same drug is not always consistent over time, so the researchers should measure access to medication in the long run.

Catastrophic pharmaceutical expenditure in patients with type 2 diabetes in Iran.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the financial burden of out-of-pocket (OOP) payments to purchase antidiabetic medicines for type 2 patients in Iran. METHOD: The "budget share" and "capacity to pay" approaches were employed to assess the catastrophic pharmaceutical expenditures of antidiabetic medication therapies. The catastrophic thresholds were adjusted for pharmaceutical sectors. The data was 2019 monthly household expenditures in rural and urban areas, insurance coverages of antidiabetic medicines and patients' out-of-pocket (OOP) payments in 30-day treatment schedules. RESULTS: The results show that expenditure on diabetes medication therapies in the form of mono-dual therapy and some cases triple oral therapies were not catastrophic even for rural households. Insulin puts patients at risk of catastrophic pharmaceutical expenditures when added to the treatment schedules, and lack of financial protection intensifies it. In general, the poorer households and those resistant to first-line treatments were at increased risk of catastrophic pharmaceutical expenditures. The number of treatments that put patients at risk of catastrophic pharmaceutical expenditure in "budget share" was higher than the "capacity to pay" approach. CONCLUSIONS: Assessing medication treatment affordability instead of a single medicine assessment is needed. Assessment could be done by utilizing a macro-level data approach and applying adjusted pharmaceutical sector threshold values. Considering the variation between treatment schedules that put patients at risk of catastrophic pharmaceutical expenditures, targeted pharmaceutical policies and reimbursement decisions are recommended to promote Universal Health Coverage (UHC) and to protect vulnerable populations from hardship.

Preserving natural teeth versus extracting them: a willingness to pay analysis.

BACKGROUND: Maximum willingness to pay (WTP) for a health benefit is related to perceived value. The goal of this study was to find out how much Iranian healthy people would be willing to pay to keep their natural teeth instead of having them pulled. This was done separately for the anterior and posterior teeth. METHODS: The highest value was posed as an open-ended question in this cross-sectional analysis conducted in 2021. Four distinct scenarios for treating a tooth with a poor prognosis for natural tooth preservation versus extraction were offered. WTP for the preferred treatment option was asked for painful and painless anterior and posterior teeth separately. A two-stage hurdle approach was employed to determine factors influencing the WTP for a hopeless case. The level of significance was fixed at 0.05. RESULTS: Out of 795 individuals, 355 (44.7%) were male and 209 (26.3%) had poor self-stated dental health. Over 65% of those interviewed said they wanted to keep their teeth. The mean WTP was highest for dental preservation up to 94 USD and the lowest was for extraction without replacement 19 USD. The WTP for anterior tooth therapy was greater than the WTP for posterior dental care, regardless of treatment type or tooth discomfort. Participants with higher education, jobs, income-to-expenditure matching, older age, preference for the treatment in a private office, and female gender (except for WTP for a painful posterior tooth) were more likely to have a WTP of at least 1 USD. CONCLUSION: The average WTP for treatment of teeth with a poor prognosis was lower than the average fee charged in dental facilities, and more than 65% of participants preferred to keep their teeth. Regardless of the treatment option or whether it was painful or not, WTP for anterior teeth treatment was higher than for posterior teeth. Generally, we found that sociodemographic factors influenced WTP decision-making the most. This study has practical implications for public oral health policymakers and insurance organizations.

Cost-Effectiveness of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Targeted Biopsy Versus Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to systematically review the cost-effectiveness studies of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-guided biopsy (MRGB) compared with systematic transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsy for diagnosing prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science core collection, Embase and Scopus, and reference lists of the included studies were searched with no date and language restrictions through January 2020 for full economic evaluation studies (cost-effectiveness, cost-utility analysis, cost-benefit analysis) that assessed mpMRI and MRGB compared with systematic TRUS-guided biopsy or other sequential biopsy strategies in men undergoing initial prostate biopsy or men with previous negative prostate biopsy, with clinical suspicion of PCa based on abnormal prostate-specific antigen or digital rectal examination increase or both. Data were tabulated and analyzed using narrative synthesis. The reporting quality of included studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. This systematic review was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. RESULTS: Finally, 9 studies were included. All studies were conducted in high-income countries. All studies found that mpMRI and MRGB was cost-effective in the initial and before repeat biopsy in men with previous negative biopsy. The cognitive-targeted TRUS-guided biopsy was cost-effective in the initial biopsy (dominant or cost-effective at willingness-to-pay threshold of the countries); it was not evaluated for repeat biopsy in men. The direct in-bore magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided biopsy was cost-effective for the initial biopsy (€323 per quality-adjusted life-year gained). The superiority of one of the targeted biopsy approaches (fusion, cognitive, or in-bore) over other approaches has not yet been established. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that pre-TRUS-guided biopsy MRI is more cost-effective than TRUS-guided biopsy alone. Furthermore, the use of MRI-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy in the diagnosis of PCa in the initial biopsy and repeat biopsy and cognitive-targeted TRUS-guided biopsy in the initial biopsy is cost-effective.

Affordability of Medication Therapy in Diabetic Patients: A Scenario-Based Assessment in Iran's Health System Context.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes imposes an enormous burden on patients, families, societies, and healthcare systems. Determining the affordability of medications is an important complicated and vague task, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This study aimed to assess the affordability of diabetes medication therapy in Iran's health system. METHODS: This paper presents a scenario-based assessment of the affordability of all registered anti-diabetes medications in Iran in 2017. To this end, 4 medication therapy scenarios were defined as mono, dual, triple, and insulin therapy in accordance with the existing guidelines and clinicians' opinions. Then the affordability ratio of each treatment scenario was determined for type 1 and type 2 diabetes drawing on the World Health Organization (WHO)/Health Action International (HAI) Methodology. If the affordability ratio for treatment schedules was more than 1, the patients' out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses exceeded the lowest-paid unskilled government worker (LPGW)' wage per day, and the treatment was labelled as non-affordable. RESULTS: The results revealed that the mono, dual, and triple (non-insulin) medication therapies in type 2 diabetes were affordable, despite an increase in the dosage or a switch from the monotherapy to the combination therapy of oral medications. However, some treatment scenarios in the triple therapy, including oral plus insulin and some insulin only therapies, were proved to be non-affordable. In type 1 diabetes, only insulin glulisine, detemir, and lispro were non-affordable in monotherapy. Regarding the combination therapy, only isophane insulin with aspart or regular insulin were affordable treatments. CONCLUSION: Although oral medication therapies were documented to be affordable, insulin therapy, with current coverage conditions, for patients with lowest paid wages and those receiving even less is unaffordable and a major barrier to treatment; hence, policy-maker should consider targeting and more financial protection policies to improve the affordability of insulin therapies among this group of patients.

Cost-effectiveness of osimertinib in the treatment of advanced EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The most common type of lung cancer is advanced and mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have reconstructed the care of these patients, the resistance of TKIs to the secondary EGFR-T790M mutation in advanced or metastatic NSCLC led to the introduction of the third generation of them, like osimertinib. Osimertinib has represented a remarkable increase in progression-free survival (PFS) and a decrease in death and hazard ratios in patients with required T790 mutation and sensitizing EGFR mutation without T790M. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of osimertinib for the treatment of these patients compared to chemotherapy or immunotherapy with the last generations of EGFR-TKIs. AREAS COVERED: Electronic searches were conducted on PubMed, Embase, Science Direct, Scopus, , Web of Knowledge, NHSEED, NHS Health Technology assessment (CRD), and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry databases. Related articles were reviewed from January 2015 to the end of August 2020. Out of 2708 initial studies, 10 articles had the inclusion criteria. EXPERT OPINION: Although osimertinib improves the quality of life and PFS for the mentioned patients based on its greater efficacy compared to standard EGFR-TKIs and chemotherapy, its high cost prevents considering it a cost-effective option. And, since most entered studies have been done in developed countries, it certainly does not true to extend these results to low-income and developing countries. Therefore, further studies in those countries are needed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of osimertinib for sensitizing EGFR mutation without T790M and required T790M in advanced or metastatic NSCLC.

Private Demand for Covid-19 Vaccine: A Contingent Assessment from a Low-and Middle-income Country.

This study aimed to estimate Iranian willingness to pay (WTP) for a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine and its determinants. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted from May 2nd to 20th, 2020 among the general population of Iran to estimate WTP for hypothetical COVID-19 vaccines. Four scenarios with different levels of efficacy and duration of protection were presented to respondents in the payment card scale of the contingent valuation method (CVM). With the corresponding WTPs under different scenarios, mean, trimmed mean, median WTP values, and vaccine demand was estimated. A semi-log regression model was employed to identify key factors. The vaccine acceptance rate and positive WTP were about 70% and 80%, respectively. The reluctant individuals believed free vaccination is a government responsibility. The highest trimmed mean and median WTP values were the US $15 and $4 for the vaccine with more than 80% efficacy and one-time vaccination. The median decreased to the US $2 in less effective scenarios. The vaccine demand was price-inelastic. Price, self-assessment virus risk, age, gender, education, income, and working in the health sector were significant factors. Given the price inelasticity of the COVID-19 vaccine, providing free vaccination by the Iranian government is highly recommended, particularly for low-income and vulnerable individuals.

Population or family history based BRCA gene tests of breast cancer? A systematic review of economic evaluations.

BACKGROUND: Nearly 56% of at-risk carriers are not identified and missed as a result of the current family-history (FH) screening for genetic testing. The present study aims to review the economic evaluation studies on BRCA genetic testing strategies for screening and early detection of breast cancer. METHODS: This systematic literature review is conducted within the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, and EMBASE databases. In this paper, the relevant published economic evaluation studies are identified by following the standard Cochrane Collaboration methods and adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement reporting some recommendations for articles up to March 2020. Thereafter, the inclusion and exclusion criteria are applied to screen the articles. Disagreements are resolved through a consensus meeting. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist is used in the evaluation of quality. Finally, a narrative synthesis is performed. To compare the different levels of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), the net present value is calculated based on a discount rate of 3% in 2019. RESULTS: Among 788 initially retrieved citations, 12 studies were included. More than 60% of the studies were originated from high-income countries and were published after 2016. It is noteworthy that most of the studies evaluated the payer perspective. Moreover, the robustness of the results were analyzed through one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses in nearly 66% of these studies. Nearly, 25% of the studies are focused and defined population-based and family history BRCA tests as comparators; afterwards, the cost-effectiveness of the former was confirmed. The highest and lowest absolute values for the ICERs were $65,661 and $9 per quality adjusted life years, respectively. All studies met over 70% of the CHEERs criteria checklist, which was considered as 93% of high quality on average as well. CONCLUSIONS: The genetic BRCA tests for the general population as well as unselected breast cancer patients were cost-effective in high and upper-middle income countries and those with prevalence of gene mutation while population-based genetic tests for low-middle income countries are depended on the price of the tests.

Men's willingness to pay for prostate cancer screening: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to review studies on willingness to pay (WTP) for prostate cancer screening. METHODS: This systematic-review was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines. By searching six-health-database, WTP studies on prostate cancer screening using contingent valuation method published in English until March 2020 were included and those with unavailable full-text and inadequate quality-assessment scores were excluded. Smith checklist was used for the quality assessment. Extracted WTPs were converted to US dollar in 2018 using exchange rate parity and net present value formula to make comparison. Factors' effect was assessed by vote counting. RESULTS: Six final studies published after 2006 reported above 70% Smith checklist items needed to be considered in contingent valuation study reports. Seven factors have positive effects on WTP. The reported WTP value varied from 11$ to 588$ in Japan and Germany, respectively. CONCLUSION: WTP for prostate cancer screening was positive among all studied men. The results of factors' effect assessment showed that better understanding prostate cancer risks or screening tests and factors such as age, income, family history of cancer, hospitalization history, and educational level have positive effects. Moreover, prostate-specific antigen history, health insurance, employment, and subject's health assessment received less attention. The results' generalization to all countries is not applicable because there are no studies for low- and middle-income countries. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020172789.

An exploratory study to estimate cost-effectiveness threshold value for life saving treatments in western Iran.

BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness analysis provides a crucial means for evidence-informed decision-making on resource allocation. This study aims to elicit individuals' willingness to pay (WTP) for one additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained from life-saving treatment and associated factors in Kermanshah city, western Iran. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study on a total of 847 adults aged 18 years and above to elicit their WTP for one additional QALY gained by oneself and a family member using a hypothetical life-saving treatment. We used a multistage sampling technique to select the samples, and the Iranian version of EQ-5D-3L, and visual analogue scale (VAS) measures to obtain the participants' health utility value. The Tobit regression model was used to identify the factors affecting WTP per QALY values. RESULTS: The mean WTP value and standard deviation (SD) was US$ 862 (3,224) for the respondents. The mean utility values using EQ-5D-3L and VAS methods for respondents were 0.779 and 0.800, respectively. Besides, the WTP for the additional QALY gained by the individual participants using the EQ-5D-3L and VAS methods were respectively US$ 1,202 and US$ 1,101, while the estimated value of the family members was US$ 1,355 (SD = 3,993). The Tobit regression models indicated that monthly income, education level, sex, and birthplace were statistically significantly associated (p < 0.05) with both the WTP for the extra QALY values using the EQ-5D-3L and the VAS methods. Educational level and monthly income also showed statistically significant relationships with the WTP for the additional QALY gained by the family members (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our findings indicated that the participants' WTP value of the additional QALY gained from the hypothetical life-saving treatment was in the range of 0.20-0.24 of the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of Iran. This value is far lower than the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended CE threshold value of one. This wide gap reflects the challenges the health system is facing and requires further research for defining the most appropriate CE threshold at the local level.

An application of analytic network process model in supporting decision making to address pharmaceutical shortage.

BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to develop an Analytic Network Process (ANP) model to assist policymakers in identifying and prioritizing allocation indicators, which are being used or should be used to distribute drugs in short supply among different provinces. METHODS: The model encompasses the interactions between various indicators and efficiency, equity, and effectiveness paradigms. Accordingly, a set of clusters and elements, which were associated with the allocation of drugs in short supply in Iran's pharmaceutical system, were detected to develop the model and were then compared in pairs in terms of a specified factor to show the priorities. RESULTS: Equity had the highest priority (0.459) following by Efficiency (0.37), and Effectiveness (0.171). The 4 most important allocation indicator were "number of prescriptions" (0.26) and "total bed occupancy rate" (0.19) related to equity, "total population" (0.21) in efficiency and "the burden of rare and incurable disease" (0.07) in effectiveness paradigm. CONCLUSIONS: The capability to overcome inefficient resource allocation patterns caused by both oversupply and undersupply derived from historic resource allocation may be highly limited in the absence of the need indicators. The quality of the decision is related to a careful balancing act of the three paradigms which represents roughly the triple aim of public healthcare systems: clinical improvement (effectiveness), population health improvement (equity and access), and reducing cost (economic aspects -efficiency).

Affordability Assessment from a Static to Dynamic Concept: A Scenario-Based Assessment of Cardiovascular Medicines.

The out-of-pocket payments for prescription medications can impose a financial burden on patients from low- and middle- incomes and who suffer from chronic diseases. The present study aims at evaluating the affordability of cardiovascular disease (CVD) medication in Iran. This includes measuring affordability through World Health Organization/Health Action International (WHO/HAI) methodology. In this method, affordability is characterized as the number of days' wages of the lowest-paid unskilled government worker. The different medication therapy scenarios are defined in mono-and combination therapy approaches. This method adds on to WHO/HAI methodology to discover new approaches to affordability assessments. The results show the differences in the medicines affordability when different approaches are used in mono-and combination therapy between 6 main sub-therapeutic groups of CVD. It indicates the medicine affordability is not a static concept and it changes dynamically between CVD therapeutic subgroups when it used alone or in combination with other medicines regarding patients' characteristics and medical conditions. Hypertension and anti-arrhythmia therapeutic groups had the most non-affordability and hyperlipidemia had the most affordable medicines. Therefore, affordability can be considered as a dynamic concept, which not only affected by the medicine price but significantly affected by a patient's characteristics, the number of medical conditions, and insurance coverage.

Policies to improve access to pharmaceutical products in shortage: the experience of Iran food and drug administration.

BACKGROUND: In the past decades, economic sanctions imposed on Iran for its nuclear program. The embargo made difficulty in foreign trade and led to lack of timely access to medicines. As the internationally-led sanctions caused to the shortage of medicine there, healthcare systems need to applied the new policies for maintaining health service quality especially in pharmaceutical sector. OBJECTIVES: This paper is about policies applied in Iran health system during the crisis reached its peak in 2012 as a good experience for guarantying access to pharmaceutical products. METHODS: Through interviewing experts and managers in pharmaceutical regulatory system, the implemented policies in targeted historical period were extracted, then quantitative data were analyzed to show the impact of the policies on the access and affordability of medicines before and after their implementation in Iran food and drug administration (IFDA). This paper tries to show strategies employed by to tackle the crisis caused by sanctions and to offer practical policies to make medicines more accessible at the time of crisis. RESULTS: In order to reduce the harmful effects of this crisis, IFDA proposed some changes at different levels ranging from organizational procedures to parliament legislations. The main achievements of IFDA were making drugs easily available are as follows, significantly reducing prices, decreasing the share of market regarding the imported medicines, facilitating the manufacture of domestic medicines, encouraging foreign investment in manufacturing drugs domestically, controlling the shortage of drugs, and finally giving financial support to all patients in general and to those patients who had problem paying for drugs in particular. CONCLUSION: These experiences which made the Iran pharmaceutical sector survive during the international sanctions, can be considered as a good example of resilience strategies in similar situations. Graphical abstract IFDA policies to improve access to pharmaceutical products in sanction.