Cost-effectiveness of gargling for the prevention of upper respiratory tract infections.

BACKGROUND: In Japan, gargling is a generally accepted way of preventing upper respiratory tract infection (URTI). The effectiveness of gargling for preventing URTI has been shown in a randomized controlled trial that compared incidences of URTI between gargling and control groups. From the perspective of the third-party payer, gargling is dominant due to the fact that the costs of gargling are borne by the participant. However, the cost-effectiveness of gargling from a societal perspective should be considered. In this study, economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial was performed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of gargling for preventing URTI from a societal perspective. METHODS: Among participants in the gargling trial, 122 water-gargling and 130 control subjects were involved in the economic analysis. Sixty-day cumulative follow-up costs and effectiveness measured by quality-adjusted life days (QALD) were compared between groups on an intention-to-treat basis. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was converted to dollars per quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The 95% confidence interval (95%CI) and probability of gargling being cost-effective were estimated by bootstrapping. RESULTS: After 60 days, QALD was increased by 0.43 and costs were $37.1 higher in the gargling group than in the control group. ICER of the gargling group was $31,800/QALY (95%CI, $1,900-$248,100). Although this resembles many acceptable forms of medical intervention, including URTI preventive measures such as influenza vaccination, the broad confidence interval indicates uncertainty surrounding our results. In addition, one-way sensitivity analysis also indicated that careful evaluation is required for the cost of gargling and the utility of moderate URTI. The major limitation of this study was that this trial was conducted in winter, at a time when URTI is prevalent. Care must be taken when applying the results to a season when URTI is not prevalent, since the ICER will increase due to decreases in incidence. CONCLUSION: This study suggests gargling as a cost-effective preventive strategy for URTI that is acceptable from perspectives of both the third-party payer and society.

[Changes in community health and welfare services with introduction of the long-term care insurance system in Japan].

OBJECTIVE: In Japan, a long-term care insurance system for elderly people was introduced in April, 2000. We have conducted a survey using a questionnaire in order to explore consequent changes in community health and welfare services. METHODS: We sent questionnaires to all municipal governments (671 cities, 1,991 towns, 567 villages and 23 wards) in Japan in November, 2001, and obtained replies from 441 cities (response rate: 65.7%), 800 towns (40.2%), 197 villages (34.9%), and 16 wards (69.6%). The questionnaire included questions concerning the budget and manpower for community health and welfare services, the state of the long term care insurance system, and the activities of public health nurses. RESULTS: A total of 57% of all municipal governments was found to be carrying out the long term care insurance program in collaboration with other governments. In order to clarify the changes in welfare services for elderly people from the budgetary viewpoint, we calculated the ratios of the 2000 and 2001 fiscal budgets applied for welfare services for elderly people, in comparison with the 1999 fiscal year. The budgets for elderly people declined to about 40% in 2000 and 2001 compared with 1999, since the budget for care services was transferred to the account of the long term care insurance system. The activities of public health nurses employed by municipal governments were not affected by the introduction of long term care insurance system. About 80% of all municipal governments suggested that both the amounts of care services received by each elderly people and the number of elderly people who received care services were increasing, and about 70% indicated that the quality of care services was improved with introduction of the long term care insurance system. DISCUSSION: Most municipal governments consider that introduction of the long term care insurance system has had a good influence on community health and welfare services. Moreover, our results suggest that the long term care insurance has a beneficial impact on care services themselves.