Expert opinion on a consensus-based checklist for the critical appraisal of cost-of-illness (COI) studies: qualitative interviews.

OBJECTIVES: This study explored experts' views on the development of a proposed checklist for cost-of-illness (COI) studies. It also investigated experts' perspectives on the use of COI studies and quality/critical appraisal tools used for COI studies as well as their experiences with the use of these tools. METHODS: Semi-structured, open-ended interviews were conducted with health economists and other experts working with COI studies and with experience of developing health economic guidelines or checklists. Participants were selected purposively using network and snowball sampling. A framework approach was applied for the thematic data analysis. Findings were reported narratively. RESULTS: Twenty-one experts from eleven different countries were interviewed. COI studies were found to be relevant to estimate the overall burden of a disease, to draw attention to disease areas, to understand different cost components, to explain cost variability, to inform decision making, and to provide input for full economic evaluations. Experts reported a lack of a standardized critical appraisal tool for COI studies. Their experience related predominantly to guidelines and checklists designed for full economic evaluations to review and assess COI studies. The following themes emerged when discussing the checklist: (i) the need for a critical appraisal tool, (ii) format and practicality, (iii) assessing the questions, (iv) addressing subjectivity, and (v) guidance requirements. CONCLUSIONS: The interviews provided relevant input for the development of a checklist for COI studies that could be used as a minimum standard and for international application. The interviews confirmed the important need for a checklist for the critical appraisal of COI studies.

A consensus-based checklist for the critical appraisal of cost-of-illness (COI) studies.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a consensus-based checklist that can be used as a minimum standard to appraise the comprehensiveness, transparency and consistency of cost-of-illness (COI) studies. This is important when, for instance, reviewing and assessing COI studies as part of a systematic review or when building an economic model. METHODS: The development process of the consensus-based checklist involved six steps: (i) a scoping review, (ii) an assessment and comparison of the different checklists and their questions, (iii) the development of a (preliminary) checklist, (iv) expert interviews, (v) the finalization of the checklist, and (vi) the development of guidance statements explaining each question. RESULTS: The result was a consensus-based checklist for the critical appraisal of COI studies, comprising seventeen main questions (and some additional subquestions) across three domains: (i) study characteristics; (ii) methodology and cost analysis; and (iii) results and reporting. Guidance statements were developed describing the purpose and meaning behind each question and listing examples of best practice. The following answer categories were suggested to be applied when answering the questions in the checklist: Yes, Partially, No, Not Applicable, or Unclear. CONCLUSIONS: The consensus-based checklist for COI studies is a first step toward standardizing the critical appraisal of COI studies and is one that could be considered a minimum standard. The checklist can help to improve comprehensiveness, transparency and consistency in COI studies, to address heterogeneity, and to enable better comparability of methodological approaches across international studies.

Exploring the wider societal impacts of sexual health issues and interventions to build a framework for research and policy: a qualitative study based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with experts in OECD member countries.

OBJECTIVES: Sexual health is a complex public health challenge and can generate wide-ranging health, social and economic impacts both within and beyond the health sector (ie, intersectoral costs and benefits). Methods are needed to capture these intersectoral impacts in economic studies to optimally inform policy/decision-making. The objectives of this study were (1) to explore the different intersectoral costs and benefits associated with sexual health issues and interventions, (2) to categorise these into sectors and (3) to develop a preliminary framework to better understand these impacts and to guide future research and policy. DESIGN: A qualitative study based on in-depth semi-structured online interviews. SETTING: OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) member countries. PARTICIPANTS: Professionals with expertise in the field of sexual health including clinicians, medical practitioners, sexologists, researchers, professionals working for international governmental or non-governmental health (policy) organisations and professionals involved in implementation and/or evaluation of sexual health interventions/programmes. METHODS: Sampling of participants was undertaken purposively. We conducted in-depth semi-structured online interviews to allow for a systemic coverage of key topics and for new ideas to emerge. We applied a Framework approach for thematic data analysis. RESULTS: 28 experts were interviewed. Six themes emerged from the interviews: (1) Interconnections to other areas of health (ie, reproductive health, mental health), (2) Relationships and family, (3) Productivity and labour, (4) Education, (5) Criminal justice/sexual violence, (6) Housing, addiction and other sectors. The findings confirm that sexual health is complex and can generate wide-ranging impacts on other areas of health and other non-health sectors of society. CONCLUSION: These different sectors need to be considered when evaluating interventions and making policy decisions. The preliminary framework can help guide future research and policy/decision-making. Future research could explore additional sectors not covered in this study and expand the preliminary framework.

Development of an Instrument for the Assessment of Health-Related Multi-sectoral Resource Use in Europe: The PECUNIA RUM.

BACKGROUND: Measuring objective resource-use quantities is important for generating valid cost estimates in economic evaluations. In the absence of acknowledged guidelines, measurement methods are often chosen based on practicality rather than methodological evidence. Furthermore, few resource-use measurement (RUM) instruments focus on the measurement of resource use in multiple societal sectors and their development process is rarely described. Thorn and colleagues proposed a stepwise approach to the development of RUM instruments, which has been used for developing cost questionnaires for specific trials. However, it remains unclear how this approach can be translated into practice and whether it is applicable to the development of generic self-reported RUM instruments and instruments measuring resource use in multiple sectors. This study provides a detailed description of the practical application of this stepwise approach to the development of a multi-sectoral RUM instrument developed within the ProgrammE in Costing, resource use measurement and outcome valuation for Use in multi-sectoral National and International health economic evaluAtions (PECUNIA) project. METHODS: For the development of the PECUNIA RUM, the methodological approach was based on best practice guidelines. The process included six steps, including the definition of the instrument attributes, identification of cost-driving elements in each sector, review of methodological literature and development of a harmonized cross-sectorial approach, development of questionnaire modules and their subsequent harmonization. RESULTS: The selected development approach was, overall, applicable to the development of the PECUNIA RUM. However, due to the complexity of the development of a multi-sectoral RUM instrument, additional steps such as establishing a uniform methodological basis, harmonization of questionnaire modules and involvement of a broader range of stakeholders (healthcare professionals, sector-specific experts, health economists) were needed. CONCLUSION: This is the first study that transparently describes the development process of a generic multi-sectoral RUM instrument in health economics and provides insights into the methodological aspects and overall validity of its development process.

Are intersectoral costs considered in economic evaluations of interventions relating to sexually transmitted infections (STIs)? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) not only have an impact on the health sector but also the private resources of those affected, their families and other sectors of society (i.e. labour, education). This study aimed to i) review and identify economic evaluations of interventions relating to STIs, which aimed to include a societal perspective; ii) analyse the intersectoral costs (i.e. costs broader than healthcare) included; iii) categorise these costs by sector; and iv) assess the impact of intersectoral costs on the overall study results. METHODS: Seven databases were searched: MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit and NHS EED. Key search terms included terms for economic evaluation, STIs and specific infections. This review considered trial- and model-based economic evaluations conducted in an OECD member country. Studies were included that assessed intersectoral costs. Intersectoral costs were extracted and categorised by sector using Drummond's cost classification scheme (i.e. patient/family, productivity, costs in other sectors). A narrative synthesis was performed. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies qualified for data extraction and narrative synthesis. Twenty-eight studies applied a societal perspective of which 8 additionally adopted a healthcare or payer perspective, or both. One study used a modified payer perspective. The following sectors were identified: patient/family, informal care, paid labour (productivity), non-paid opportunity costs, education, and consumption. Patient/family costs were captured in 11 studies and included patient time, travel expenses, out-of-pocket costs and premature burial costs. Informal caregiver support (non-family) and unpaid help by family/friends was captured in three studies. Paid labour losses were assessed in all but three studies. Three studies also captured the costs and inability to perform non-paid work. Educational costs and future non-health consumption costs were each captured in one study. The inclusion of intersectoral costs resulted in more favourable cost estimates. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review suggests that economic evaluations of interventions relating to STIs that adopt a societal perspective tend to be limited in scope. There is an urgent need for economic evaluations to be more comprehensive in order to allow policy/decision-makers to make better-informed decisions.

Associations between muscle mass/strength and healthcare costs/use for patients with cancer: A systematic literature review.

PURPOSE: To review published scientific evidence evaluating the potential associations between muscle mass/strength and healthcare use/costs for patients with cancer. METHODS: In accordance with the predefined protocol for a systematic literature review, studies assessing potential associations between muscle mass/strength and healthcare costs/use in cancer patients were searched on MEDLINE (via Ovid) and on the NHS Economic Evaluation Database in September 2021. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Of 613 studies identified, five met our inclusion criteria. Various outcomes were investigated: for length of hospital stay, one out of three studies reported an association between lower muscle mass and longer hospital stay; for hospital admission, the two identified studies did not highlight muscle weakness as a predictor of hospital admission; for hospital readmission, one out of two studies reported that patients with lower muscle mass had higher rates of hospital readmission; for costs and cost-effectiveness, results of two randomized controlled trials were mixed, with total costs of the intervention higher in one study and lower in the other, leading to opposite cost-effectiveness results. CONCLUSION: Only five studies evaluating potential associations between mass/strength and healthcare use/costs have been highlighted within this systematic review. The amount of evidence is limited but the studies are also very heterogeneous in regards of study designs, sample size, and type of population included. This important heterogeneity prevents drawing strong conclusions. Because of limited data available, more high quality longitudinal studies are needed to further investigate the relationship between muscle mass/strength and healthcare costs/use.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of dynamic bracing versus standard care alone in patients suffering from osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: protocol for a multicentre, two-armed, parallel-group randomised controlled trial with 12 months of follow-up.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with osteoporosis may suffer from a fracture after minimal trauma. Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) are among the most common fractures, often leading to substantial pain. There is a need for evidence-based conservative treatment to aid in the management of OVCFs. The objective of this randomised controlled trial (RCT) is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of dynamic bracing in addition to standard care for improving quality of life (QoL) in patients suffering from an OVCF. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Ninety-eight postmenopausal women from two academic and four community hospitals with a recent symptomatic thoracolumbar OVCF will be randomised into either the standard care or dynamic bracing group. In the dynamic bracing group, the Spinova Osteo orthosis will be used in addition to standard care. Standard care comprises pain control with analgesics, physical therapy and osteoporosis medication. The primary outcome parameter is QoL 1 year after inclusion, as measured by the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO-41). Secondary outcome parameters are pain, pain medication used, functional disability, sagittal spinal alignment, recurrence rate of OVCFs and physical activity in daily life. A trial-based economic evaluation consisting of both cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-utility analysis will be performed based on empirical data obtained in the RCT. A process evaluation will assess the feasibility of dynamic bracing. All outcomes will be assessed at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months and 12 months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the Medical Ethics Committee, University Hospital Maastricht and Maastricht University (METC azM/UM) (NL74552.068.20/METC 20-055). Patients will be included only after verification of eligibility and obtaining written informed consent. Results will be disseminated via the Dutch National Osteoporosis Patient Society and via publications and conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NL8746.

Intersectoral costs of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV: a systematic review of cost-of-illness (COI) studies.

BACKGROUND: Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV can generate costs both within and outside the health sector (i.e. intersectoral costs). This systematic review aims (i) to explore the intersectoral costs associated with STIs and HIV considered in cost-of-illness (COI) studies, (ii) to categorise and analyse these costs according to cost sectors, and (iii) to illustrate the impact of intersectoral costs on the total cost burden. METHODS: Medline (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit and NHS EED were searched between 2009 and 2019. Key search terms included terms for cost-of-illness, cost analysis and all terms for STIs including specific infections. Studies were included that assessed intersectoral costs. A standardised data extraction form was adopted. A cost component table was established based on pre-defined sector-specific classification schemes. Cost results for intersectoral costs were recorded. The quality of studies was assessed using a modified version of the CHEC-list. RESULTS: 75 COI studies were considered for title/abstract screening. Only six studies were available in full-text and eligible for data extraction and narrative synthesis. Intersectoral costs were captured in the following sectors: Patient & family, Informal care and Productivity (Paid Labour). Patient & family costs were addressed in four studies, including patient out-of-pocket payments/co-payments and travel costs. Informal care costs including unpaid (home) care support by family/friends and other caregiver costs were considered in three studies. All six studies estimated productivity costs for paid labour including costs in terms of absenteeism, disability, cease-to-work, presenteeism and premature death. Intersectoral costs largely contributed to the total economic cost burden of STIs and HIV. The quality assessment revealed methodological differences. CONCLUSIONS: It is evident that intersectoral costs associated with STIs and HIV are substantial. If relevant intersectoral costs are not included in cost analyses the total cost burden of STIs and HIV to society is severely underestimated. Therefore, intersectoral costs need to be addressed in order to ensure the total economic burden of STIs and HIV on society is assessed, and communicated to policy/decision-makers.

Do Costs in the Education Sector Matter? A Systematic Literature Review of the Economic Impact of Psychosocial Problems on the Education Sector.

BACKGROUND: Psychosocial (e.g., anxiety or behavior) problems lead to costs not only in the healthcare sector but also in education and other sectors. As psychosocial problems develop during the critical period of establishing educational trajectories, education costs are particularly relevant in the context of psychosocial problems among children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to gain insights into the methods used for the inclusion of education costs in health economics studies and into the proportion of the education costs in relation to the total costs associated with a condition or an intervention. METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, SSCI, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, and Econlit databases in August 2019 for economic evaluations of mental health, psychosocial and educational interventions, and cost-of-illness studies of mental, behavioral, and neurodevelopmental disorders conducted from a societal perspective in populations of children and adolescents. An additional search was conducted in February 2021 to update the review. RESULTS: In total, 49 articles were included in the analysis. The most common cost items were special education, school absenteeism, and various educational professionals (educational psychologist). A variety of methods were employed for the identification, measurement, and/or valuation of education costs. The proportion of education costs to the total costs of condition/intervention ranged from 0 to 67%, with the mean being 18.5%. DISCUSSION: Since education costs can constitute a significant proportion of the total costs of an intervention or condition, including them in health economics studies might be important in informing optimal resource allocation decisions. Although various methods are available for including education costs in health economics studies, further research is needed to develop evidence-based methods for producing comparable estimates.

Aspects and Challenges of Resource Use Measurement in Health Economics: Towards a Comprehensive Measurement Framework.

BACKGROUND: While the methods for conducting health economics research in general are improving, current guidelines provide limited guidance regarding resource use measurement (RUM). Consequently, a variety of methods exists, yet there is no overview of aspects to consider when deciding on the most appropriate RUM methodology. Therefore, this study aims to (1) identify and categorize existing knowledge regarding aspects of RUM, and (2) develop a framework that provides a comprehensive overview of methodological aspects regarding RUM. METHODS: Relevant articles were identified by enrolling a search string in six databases and handsearching the DIRUM database. Included articles were descriptively reviewed and served as input for a comprehensive framework. Health economics experts were involved during the process to establish the framework's face validity. RESULTS: Forty articles were included in the scoping review. The RUM framework consists of four methodological RUM domains: 'Whom to measure', addressing whom to ask and whom to measure; 'How to measure', addressing the different approaches of measurement; 'How often to measure', addressing recall period and measurement patterns; and 'Additional considerations', which covers additional aspects that are essential for further refining the methodologies for measurement. Evidence retrieved from the scoping review was categorized according to these domains. CONCLUSION: This study clustered the aspects of RUM methodology in health economics into a comprehensive framework. The results may guide health economists in their decision making regarding the selection of appropriate RUM methods and developing instruments for RUM. Furthermore, policy makers may use these findings to review study results from an evidence-based perspective.

The broader societal impacts of COVID-19 and the growing importance of capturing these in health economic analyses.

AbstractThe rapid spread of the current COVID-19 pandemic has affected societies worldwide, leading to excess mortality, long-lasting health consequences, strained healthcare systems, and additional strains and spillover effects on other sectors outside health (i.e., intersectoral costs and benefits). In this perspective piece, we demonstrate the broader societal impacts of COVID-19 on other sectors outside the health sector and the growing importance of capturing these in health economic analyses. These broader impacts include, for instance, the effects on the labor market and productivity, education, criminal justice, housing, consumption, and environment. The current pandemic highlights the importance of adopting a societal perspective to consider these broader impacts of public health issues and interventions and only omit these where it can be clearly justified as appropriate to do so. Furthermore, we explain how the COVID-19 pandemic exposed and exacerbated existing deep-rooted structural inequalities that contribute to the wider societal impacts of the pandemic.

The Relative Importance of Education and Criminal Justice Costs and Benefits in Economic Evaluations: A Best-Worst Scaling Experiment.

OBJECTIVES: Mental and behavioural disorders (MBDs) and interventions targeting MBDs lead to costs and cost savings in the healthcare sector, but also in other sectors. The latter are referred to as intersectoral costs and benefits (ICBs). Interventions targeting MBDs often lead to ICBs in the education and criminal justice sectors, yet these are rarely included in economic evaluations. This study aimed to investigate the attitudes held by health economists and health technology assessment experts towards education and criminal justice ICBs in economic evaluations and to quantify the relative importance of these ICBs in the context of MBDs. METHODS: An online survey containing open-ended questions and two best-worst scaling object case studies was conducted in order to prioritise a list of 20 education ICBs and 20 criminal justice ICBs. Mean relative importance scores for each ICB were generated using hierarchical Bayes analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-nine experts completed the survey. The majority of the respondents (68%) reported that ICBs were relevant, but only a few (32%) included them in economic evaluations. The most important education ICBs were "special education school attendance", "absenteeism from school", and "reduced school attainment". The most important criminal justice ICBs were "decreased chance of committing a crime as a consequence/effect of mental health programmes/interventions", "jail and prison expenditures", and "long-term pain and suffering of victims/victimisation". CONCLUSIONS: This study identified the most important education and criminal justice ICBs for economic evaluations of interventions targeting MBDs and suggests that it could be relevant to include these ICBs in economic evaluations.

Exploring the identification, validation, and categorization of the cost and benefits of criminal justice in mental health: the PECUNIA project.

BACKGROUND: Mental health disorders and their treatments produce significant costs and benefits in both healthcare and non-healthcare sectors. The latter are often referred to as intersectoral costs and benefits (ICBs). Little is known about healthcare-related ICBs in the criminal justice sector and how to include these in health economics research. OBJECTIVES: The triple aim of this study is (i) to identify healthcare-related ICBs in the criminal justice sector, (ii) to validate the list of healthcare-related ICBs in the criminal justice sector on a European level by sector-specific experts, and (iii) to classify the identified ICBs. METHODS: A scientific literature search in PubMed and an additional grey literature search, carried out in six European countries, were used to retrieve ICBs. In order to validate the international applicability of the ICBs, a survey was conducted with an international group of experts from the criminal justice sector. The list of criminal justice ICBs was categorized according to the PECUNIA conceptual framework. RESULTS: The full-text analysis of forty-five peer-reviewed journal articles and eleven grey literature sources resulted in a draft list of items. Input from the expert survey resulted in a final list of fourteen unique criminal justice ICBs, categorized according to the care atom. CONCLUSION: This study laid further foundations for the inclusion of important societal costs of mental health-related interventions within the criminal justice sector. More research is needed to facilitate the further and increased inclusion of ICBs in health economics research.

A new instrument to measure high value, cost-conscious care attitudes among healthcare stakeholders: development of the MHAQ.

BACKGROUND: Residents have to learn to provide high value, cost-conscious care (HVCCC) to counter the trend of excessive healthcare costs. Their learning is impacted by individuals from different stakeholder groups within the workplace environment. These individuals' attitudes toward HVCCC may influence how and what residents learn. This study was carried out to develop an instrument to reliably measure HVCCC attitudes among residents, staff physicians, administrators, and patients. The instrument can be used to assess the residency-training environment. METHOD: The Maastricht HVCCC Attitude Questionnaire (MHAQ) was developed in four phases. First, we conducted exploratory factor analyses using original data from a previously published survey. Next, we added nine items to strengthen subscales and tested the new questionnaire among the four stakeholder groups. We used exploratory factor analysis and Cronbach's alphas to define subscales, after which the final version of the MHAQ was constructed. Finally, we used generalizability theory to determine the number of respondents (residents or staff physicians) needed to reliably measure a specialty attitude score. RESULTS: Initial factor analysis identified three subscales. Thereafter, 301 residents, 297 staff physicians, 53 administrators and 792 patients completed the new questionnaire between June 2017 and July 2018. The best fitting subscale composition was a three-factor model. Subscales were defined as high-value care, cost incorporation, and perceived drawbacks. Cronbach's alphas were between 0.61 and 0.82 for all stakeholders on all subscales. Sufficient reliability for assessing national specialty attitude (G-coefficient > 0.6) could be achieved from 14 respondents. CONCLUSIONS: The MHAQ reliably measures individual attitudes toward HVCCC in different stakeholders in health care contexts. It addresses key dimensions of HVCCC, providing content validity evidence. The MHAQ can be used to identify frontrunners of HVCCC, pinpoint aspects of residency training that need improvement, and benchmark and compare across specialties, hospitals and regions.

Five pillars for societal perspective.

In economic evaluation, the healthcare perspective has gradually given way to use of the societal perspective, as this perspective is often advocated for support in making optimal societal decisions. In practice, economic evaluations conducted from the societal perspective ignore, fail to measure and/or fail to monetize many of the costs that fall outside of the healthcare sector. To limit bias and increase decision-supportive power, researchers could strengthen their evaluations by adhering to a few basic principles. Five "pillars for the societal perspective" are proposed. First, who bears the cost and who does not is irrelevant. Second, it is imperative to consider including costs for sectors outside the healthcare sector. Third, both high frequent costs and costs with high unit prices should be considered. Fourth, double counting should be avoided. And fifth, researchers should reflect on choices related to costs, i.e. cost omission and problems with identifying, measuring, and valuing costs.

Intersectoral Costs and Benefits of Mental and Behavioural Disorders in the Education Sector: an Exploration of Costing Methods.

BACKGROUND: The inclusion of indirect spillover costs and benefits that occur in non-healthcare sectors of society is necessary to make optimal societal decisions when assessing the cost effectiveness of healthcare interventions. Education costs and benefits are relevant in the disease area of mental and behavioral disorders, but their inclusion in economic evaluations is largely neglected due to lack of methodological knowledge. AIM OF THE STUDY: This study aims to explore, using a scoping review, the identification, measurement, and valuation methods used to assess the impact of mental and behavioural disorders on education costs and benefits. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted to identify articles that were set in the education sector and assessed education costs and benefits. An adapted 5-step approach was used: (i) initating a scoping review; (ii) identifying component studies; (iii) data extraction; (iv) reporting results; (v) discussion and interpretation of findings. Results were summarized in a narrative synthesis per identification, measurement, and valuation method. RESULTS: 177 component articles were identified in the scoping review that reported 61 mutually exclusive education costs and benefits. The nomenclature used to describe the costs and benefits was poorly defined, heterogeneous in nature and largely context dependent. This was also reflected in the diverse number of measurement and valuation methods found in the component articles. DISCUSSION: This is the first study, which offers a classification of education costs and benefits and costing methods reported by studies set in the education sector. In conclusion, mental and behavioral disorders have a notable impact on a variety of different education costs and benefits. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: The classification provided in the current study gives an indication of the wide-spread impact of mental and behavioral disorders on the education sector. Hence, the inclusion of relevant education costs and benefits in economic evaluations for mental and behavioral disorders is necessary to make optimal societal decisions. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: By exploring a new area of research from a sector-specific perspective, the current study adds to the existing intersectoral cost and benefit literature base. Future research should focus on standardizing costing methods in pharmacoeconomic guidelines and assessing the relative importance of individual education costs and benefits in economic evaluations for specific interventions and diseases.

Chronic Kidney Disease: Exploring Value-Based Healthcare as a Potential Viable Solution.

BACKGROUND: Increasing healthcare expenditures have triggered a trend from volume to value by linking patient outcome to costs. This concept first described as value-based healthcare (VBHC) by Michael Porter is especially applicable for chronic conditions. This article aims to explore the applicability of the VBHC framework to the chronic kidney disease (CKD) care area. METHODS: The 4 dimensions of VBHC (measure value; set and communicate value benchmarking; coordinate care; payment to reward value-add) were explored for the CKD care area. Available data was reviewed focusing on CKD initiatives in Europe to assess to what extent each of the 4 dimensions of VBHC have been applied in practice. RESULTS: Translating VBHC into value-based renal care (VBRC) seems to be initiated to a limited extent in European health systems. In most cases not all dimensions of VBHC have been utilized in the renal care initiatives. CONCLUSION: The translation of VBHC into VBRC is possible and even desirable if an optimal treatment pathway for CKD patients could be achieved. This would require an organizational change in health system set up and should include a strategy focusing on full care responsibility. The patient outcome perspective and health economic analysis need to be the centre of attention.

Evidence-informed vaccine decision making: The introduction of Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccination in the Netherlands.

Little is known about the role of (economic) information or evidence in the different stages of the decision-making process on vaccine introduction. By conducting a document analysis on the public decision-making process of introducing human Papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine into the national vaccination program (NVP) in the Netherlands, we aim to gain insight into which information plays a role during the introduction of a vaccination programme. A document analysis was performed on the public decision-making process regarding the introduction of HPV vaccine into the NVP in the Netherlands. Information used or asked for by various stakeholders during different stages of the policymaking process was identified. In total, 42 documents were found, analyzed and synthesized, for the period between August 2006 and September 2009. Documents were analyzed using directed content analysis based on eight broad categories of criteria used in decision-making frameworks for introducing a vaccine. Our analysis demonstrates that a wide variety of stakeholders is involved in the process. Financial or economic issues were stipulated in 64.3% of the documents and information on vaccine characteristics were discussed in 59.5%. Economic information from economic evaluations was discussed most (47.6%). Based on our analysis, it can be concluded that economic information, in particular information from economic evaluations, played an important role in the decision-making process regarding the introduction of HPV-vaccination.

Household costs and time to treatment for children with severe febrile illness in rural Burkina Faso: the role of rectal artesunate.

BACKGROUND: Community health workers (CHWs) were trained to identify children with malaria who could not take oral medication, treat them with rectal artesunate (RA) and refer them to the closest healthcare facility to complete management. However, many children with such symptoms did not seek CHWs' care. The hypothesis was that the cost of referral to a health facility was a deterrent. The goal of this study was to compare the out-of-pocket costs and time to seek treatment for children who sought CHW care (and received RA) versus those who did not. METHODS: Children with symptoms of severe malaria receiving RA at CHWs and children with comparable disease symptoms who did not go to a CHW were identified and their parents were interviewed. Household out-of-pocket costs per illness episode and speed of treatment were evaluated and compared between RA-treated children vs. non-RA treated children and by central nervous symptoms (CNS: repeated convulsions, altered consciousness or coma). RESULTS: Among children with CNS symptoms, costs of RA-treated children were similar to those of non-RA treated children ($5.83 vs. $4.65; p = 0.52), despite higher transport costs ($2.74 vs. $0.91; p < 0.0001). However, among children without CNS symptoms, costs of RA-treated children were higher than the costs of non-RA treated children with similar symptoms ($5.62 vs. $2.59; p = 0.0001), and the main driver of the cost difference was transport. After illness onset, CNS children reached CHWs for RA an average of 9.0 h vs. 16.1 h for non-RA treated children reaching first treatment [difference 7.1 h (95% CI - 1.8 to 16.1), p = 0.11]. For non-CNS patients the average time to CHW-delivered RA treatment was 12.2 h vs. 20.1 h for those reaching first treatment [difference 7.9 h (95% CI 0.2-15.6), p = 0.04]. More non-RA treated children developed CNS symptoms before arrival at the health centre but the difference was not statistically significant (6% vs. 4%; p = 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: Community health worker-delivered RA does not affect the total out-of-pocket costs when used in children with CNS symptoms, but is associated with higher total out-of-pocket costs when used in children with less severe symptoms. RA-treated children sought treatment more quickly.

Varying Opinions on Who Deserves Collectively Financed Health Care Services: A Discrete Choice Experiment on Allocation Preferences of the General Public.

In Europe, health insurance arrangements are under reform. These arrangements redistribute collectively financed resources to ensure access to health care for all. Allocation of health services is historically based on medical needs, but use of other criteria, such as lifestyle, is debated upon. Does the general public also have preferences for conditional allocation? This depends on their opinions regarding deservingness. The aim of this study was to gain insight in those opinions, specifically by examining the perceived weight of different criteria in allocation decisions. Based on literature and expert interviews, we included 5 criteria in a discrete choice experiment: need, financial capacity, lifestyle, cooperation with treatment, and package/premium choice. A representative sample of the Dutch population was invited to participate (n = 10 760). A total of 774 people accessed the questionnaire (7.2%), of whom 375 completed it (48.4%). Medical need was overall the most important criterion in determining deservingness (range ß = 1.60). Perceived deservingness decreased if claimants had higher financial capacity (1.26) and unhealthier lifestyle (1.04), if their cooperation was less optimal (1.05), or if they had opted for less insurance coverage (0.56). However, preferences vary among respondents, in relation to demographic and ideological factors.