Health and economic burden of insufficient physical activity in Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: Insufficient physical activity (PA) was estimated to cause 4.8% of deaths and 2.6% of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) due to noncommunicable diseases in Saudi Arabia in 2019. While Saudi Arabia is already achieving great improvements, we predict the health and economic burden of insufficient PA up to 2040 to present a case for policy makers to invest more in the uptake of PA. METHODS: Using a population health model to estimate avoidable health loss, we identified four causes of health loss related to low PA (cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, breast cancer, and colorectal cancer) and estimated the deaths and DALYs from these causes. We projected the expected disease burden until 2040 under alternative assumptions about future PA levels and trends by using three health scenarios: baseline (no change in 2019 PA levels), intervention (81% of the population achieving sufficient PA levels), and ideal (65% of population: moderate PA, 30%: high PA, and 5%: inactive). We applied an "intrinsic value" approach to estimate the economic impact of each scenario. RESULTS: Overall, we estimate that between 2023 and 2040, about 80,000 to 110,000 deaths from all causes and 2.0 million to 2.9 million DALYs could be avoided by increasing PA levels in Saudi Arabia. The average annual economic loss from insufficient PA is valued at 0.49% to 0.68% of the current gross domestic product, with an average of US$5.4 billion to US$7.6 billion annually till 2040. The most avoidable disease burden and economic losses are expected among males and because of ischemic heart disease. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that low PA levels will have considerable health and economic impacts in Saudi Arabia if people remain inactive and do not start following interventions. There is an urgent need to develop innovative programs and policies to encourage PA among all age and sex groups.

Global Assessment of Palliative Care Need: Serious Health-Related Suffering Measurement Methodology.

CONTEXT: Inequities and gaps in palliative care access are a serious impediment to health systems especially in low- and middle-income countries and the accurate measurement of need across health conditions is a critical step to understanding and addressing the issue. Serious Health-related Suffering (SHS) is a novel methodology to measure the palliative care need and was originally developed by The Lancet Commission on Global Access to Palliative Care and Pain Relief. In 2015, the first iteration - SHS 1.0 - was estimated at over 61 million people worldwide experiencing at least 6 billion days of SHS annually as a result of life-limiting and life-threatening conditions. OBJECTIVES: In this paper, an updated methodology - SHS 2.0 - is presented building on the work of the Lancet Commission and detailing calculations, data requirements, limitations, and assumptions. METHODS AND RESULTS: The updates to the original methodology focus on measuring the number of people who die with (decedents) or live with (non-decedents) SHS in a given year to assess the number of people in need of palliative care across health conditions and populations. Detail on the methodology for measuring the number of days of SHS that was pioneered by the Lancet Commission, is also shared, as this second measure is essential for determining the health system responses that are necessary to address palliative care need and must be a priority for future methodological work on SHS. CONCLUSIONS: The methodology encompasses opportunities for applying SHS to future policy making assessment of future research priorities particularly in light of the dearth of data from low- and middle-income countries, and sharing of directions for future work to develop SHS 3.0.

The economic costs of orthopaedic services: a health system cost analysis of tertiary hospitals in a low-income country.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic injuries are rising globally, disproportionately affecting low- and middle-income countries, constituting 88% of the burden of surgically treatable conditions. While contributing to the highest burden, LMICs also have the least availability of resources to address this growing burden effectively. Studies on the cost-of-service provision in these settings have concentrated on the most common traumatic injuries, leaving an evidence gap on other traumatic injuries. This study aimed to address the gap in understanding the cost of orthopaedic services in low-income settings by conducting a comprehensive costing analysis in two tertiary-level hospitals in Malawi. METHODS: We used a mixed costing methodology, utilising both Top-Down and Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing approaches. Data on resource utilisation, personnel costs, medicines, supplies, capital costs, laboratory costs, radiology service costs, and overhead costs were collected for one year, from July 2021 to June 2022. We conducted a retrospective review of all the available patient files for the period under review. Assumptions on the intensity of service use were based on utilisation patterns observed in patient records. All costs were expressed in 2021 United States Dollars. RESULTS: We conducted a review of 2,372 patient files, 72% of which were male. The median length of stay for all patients was 9.5 days (8-11). The mean weighted cost of treatment across the entire pathway varied, ranging from $195 ($136-$235) for Supracondylar Fractures to $711 ($389-$931) for Proximal Ulna Fractures. The main cost components were personnel (30%) and medicines and supplies (23%). Within diagnosis-specific costs, the length of stay was the most significant cost driver, contributing to the substantial disparity in treatment costs between the two hospitals. CONCLUSION: This study underscores the critical role of orthopaedic care in LMICs and the need for context-specific cost data. It highlights the variation in cost drivers and resource utilisation patterns between hospitals, emphasising the importance of tailored healthcare planning and resource allocation approaches. Understanding the costs of surgical interventions in LMICs can inform policy decisions and improve access to essential orthopaedic services, potentially reducing the disease burden associated with trauma-related injuries. We recommend that future studies focus on evaluating the cost-effectiveness of orthopaedic interventions, particularly those that have not been analysed within the existing literature.

Service readiness for the management of non-communicable diseases in publicly financed facilities in Malawi: findings from the 2019 Harmonised Health Facility Assessment census survey.

INTRODUCTION: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are rising in low-income and middle-income countries, including Malawi. To inform policy-makers and planners on the preparedness of the Malawian healthcare system to respond to NCDs, we estimated NCD service readiness in publicly financed healthcare facilities in Malawi. METHODS: We analysed data from 564 facilities surveyed in the 2019 Harmonised Health Facility Assessment, including 512 primary healthcare (PHC) and 52 secondary and tertiary care (STC) facilities. To characterise service readiness, applying the law of minimum, we estimated the percentage of facilities with functional equipment and unexpired medicines required to provide NCD services. Further, we estimated permanently unavailable items to identify service readiness bottlenecks. RESULTS: Fewer than 40% of PHC facilities were ready to deliver services for each of the 14 NCDs analysed. Insulin and beclomethasone inhalers had the lowest stock levels at PHC facilities (6% and 8%, respectively). Only 17% of rural and community hospitals (RCHs) have liver and kidney diagnostics. STC facilities had varying service readiness, ranging from 27% for managing acute diabetes complications to 94% for chronic type 2 diabetes management. Only 38% of STC facilities were ready to manage chronic heart failure. Oral pain medicines were widely available at all levels of health facilities; however, only 22% of RCHs and 29% of STCs had injectable morphine or pethidine. Beclomethasone was never available at 74% of PHC and 29% of STC facilities. CONCLUSION: Publicly financed facilities in Malawi are generally unprepared to provide NCD services, especially at the PHC level. Targeted investments in PHC can substantially improve service readiness for chronic NCD conditions in local communities and enable STC to respond to acute NCD complications and more complex NCD cases.

The Role of HTA for Essential Health Benefit Package Design in Low or Middle-Income Countries.

This Commentary explores the relationship between Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Health Benefits Package (HBP) design to achieve Universal Health Coverage (UHC) in low- and middle-income countries. It emphasizes that while HTA evaluates individual healthcare interventions, HBP reform aims to create comprehensive service sets considering overall population health needs and available resources. Challenges in LMICs include limited local data and technical capacity, leading to reliance on cost-effectiveness estimates from other settings. We suggest a practical approach by combining HTA and HBP elements through a hybrid or compartmentalized method. This approach sets differentiated cost-effectiveness thresholds for specific healthcare platforms or programs (e.g., primary care or essential surgery), aligning priority-setting with organizational considerations, ethics, and implementation strategies. Strong institutions and academic support are vital for evidence-informed priority-setting processes. In summary, HTA can play a pivotal role in designing HBPs for UHC in LMICs, and a compartmentalized approach can enhance priority-setting while considering budget constraints and equity.

Burden of disease and barriers to comprehensive care for rheumatic heart disease in South Africa: an updated systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) is responsible for a significant burden of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and remains the most common cause of acquired heart disease among children and young adults in low-income and middle-income countries. Additionally, the global COVID-19 pandemic has forced the emergency restructuring of many health systems, which has had a broad impact on health in general, including cardiovascular disease. Despite significant cost to the health system and estimates from 2015 indicating both high incidence and prevalence of RHD in South Africa, no cohesive national strategy exists. An updated review of national burden of disease estimates, as well as literature on barriers to care for patients with RHD, will provide crucial information to assist in the development of a national RHD programme. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using predefined search terms that capture relevant disease processes from Group A Streptococcal (GAS) infection through to the sequelae of RHD, a search of PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, Sabinet African Journals, SA Heart and Current and Completed Research databases will be performed. All eligible studies on RHD, acute rheumatic fever and GAS infection published from April 2014 to December 2022 will be included. Vital registration data for the same period from Statistics South Africa will also be collected. A standardised data extraction form will be used to capture results for both quantitative and qualitative analyses. All studies included in burden of disease estimates will undergo quality assessment using standardised tools. Updated estimates on mortality and morbidity as well as a synthesis of work on primary, secondary and tertiary prevention of RHD will be reported. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics clearance is required for this study. Findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and submitted to national stakeholders in RHD. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023392782.

Monitoring and evaluating the implementation of essential packages of health services.

Essential packages of health services (EPHS) are a critical tool for achieving universal health coverage, especially in low-income and lower middle-income countries. However, there is a lack of guidance and standards for monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of EPHS implementation. This paper is the final in a series of papers reviewing experiences using evidence from the Disease Control Priorities, third edition publications in EPHS reforms in seven countries. We assess current approaches to EPHS M&E, including case studies of M&E approaches in Ethiopia and Pakistan. We propose a step-by-step process for developing a national EPHS M&E framework. Such a framework would start with a theory of change that links to the specific health system reforms the EPHS is trying to accomplish, including explicit statements about the 'what' and 'for whom' of M&E efforts. Monitoring frameworks need to consider the additional demands that could be placed on weak and already overstretched data systems, and they must ensure that processes are put in place to act quickly on emergent implementation challenges. Evaluation frameworks could learn from the field of implementation science; for example, by adapting the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework to policy implementation. While each country will need to develop its own locally relevant M&E indicators, we encourage all countries to include a set of core indicators that are aligned with the Sustainable Development Goal 3 targets and indicators. Our paper concludes with a call to reprioritise M&E more generally and to use the EPHS process as an opportunity for strengthening national health information systems. We call for an international learning network on EPHS M&E to generate new evidence and exchange best practices.

Effects of public financing of essential maternal and child health interventions across wealth quintiles in Nigeria: an extended cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Maternal and newborn mortality rates in Nigeria are among the highest globally, and large socioeconomic inequalities exist in access to maternal, newborn, and child health (MNCH) services in the country. Inequalities also exist in catastrophic health expenditure among households in Nigeria. We aimed to estimate the health and financial risk protection benefits across different wealth groups in Nigeria if a policy of public financing of MNCH interventions were to be introduced. METHODS: We did an extended cost-effectiveness analysis to estimate the health and financial risk protection benefits, across different household wealth quintiles, of a public-financing policy that assumes zero out-of-pocket costs to patients at the point of care for 18 essential MNCH services. We projected health outcomes (deaths in children aged <5 years [under-5 deaths] and maternal deaths) and private expenditure averted using the Lives Saved Tool with data extracted from national surveys. We modelled three scenarios: 1) coverage expansion at a rate equal to the trend observed between 2013 and 2018 (status quo); 2) annual coverage expansion by 5% compared with the status quo (uniform scale-up scenario); and 3) annual coverage expansion by 10%, 8%, 6%, 4%, and 2% compared with the status quo from the poorest to the wealthiest quintiles, respectively (pro-poor scale-up scenario). FINDINGS: Our analysis shows that, if an additional 5% increase in coverage was provided for all wealth quintiles between 2019 and 2030, this uniform scale-up policy would prevent more than 0·11 million maternal deaths and 1·05 million under-5 deaths, avert US$1·8 billion in private expenditure, and avert 3266 cases of catastrophic health expenditure. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio would be $44 per life-year gained, which is highly cost-effective when compared with the gross domestic product per capita of Nigeria for 2018 ($2028). The policy would prevent a higher number of under-5 deaths and catastrophic health expenditure cases in poorer quintiles, but would prevent more maternal deaths and private expenditure in wealthier quintiles. If poorer populations experienced a greater increase in service coverage (ie, the pro-poor scale-up scenario), more maternal and under-5 deaths would be prevented in the poorer quintiles and more private expenditure would be averted than would be under previous scenarios. INTERPRETATION: Public financing of essential MNCH interventions in Nigeria would provide substantial health and financial risk protection benefits to Nigerian households. These benefits would accrue preferentially to the poorest quintiles and would contribute towards reduction of health and socioeconomic inequalities in Nigeria. The distribution would be more pro-poor if public financing of MNCH interventions could target poor households. FUNDING: WHO Partnership for Maternal, Newborn, and Child Health.

Projecting Long-Term Care Costs for Home and Community-Based Services in China from 2005 to 2050.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to estimate and project the trend in long-term care (LTC) costs for home and community-based services as a percentage of gross domestic product in China between 2005 and 2050. DESIGN: Longitudinal. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We used 61,249 observations from 37,702 adults age ≥65 years from waves 2005, 2008, 2011, 2014, and 2018 of the Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Surveys. METHODS: LTC costs for home and community-based services consisted of the monetary value of time spent on LTC and the direct LTC cost. We used the age-sex-residence-specific weights provided by the Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Surveys to estimate the LTC costs from 2005 to 2018. We used a component-based model to project LTC costs, in which the 2-part model was used to estimate the average LTC costs and the multi-state Markov model approach was used to project the future population by age, sex, and disability state. RESULTS: The percentage of older adults with disabilities was projected to increase from 6.1% in 2005 to 7.5% in 2020 and 9.6% in 2050. The total LTC cost for home and community-based services were projected to increase from 0.3% of gross domestic product in 2005 to 0.7% in 2020 and to 6.4% in 2050. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Policymakers in China should take urgent actions to delay the onset of disabilities among older adults, which would curb the increasing LTC costs and maintain the sustainability of the LTC policies.

Economic evaluation of implementation science outcomes in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Historically, the focus of cost-effectiveness analyses has been on the costs to operate and deliver interventions after their initial design and launch. The costs related to design and implementation of interventions have often been omitted. Ignoring these costs leads to an underestimation of the true price of interventions and biases economic analyses toward favoring new interventions. This is especially true in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where implementation may require substantial up-front investment. This scoping review was conducted to explore the topics, depth, and availability of scientific literature on integrating implementation science into economic evaluations of health interventions in LMICs. METHODS: We searched Web of Science and PubMed for papers published between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2021, that included components of both implementation science and economic evaluation. Studies from LMICs were prioritized for review, but papers from high-income countries were included if their methodology/findings were relevant to LMIC settings. RESULTS: Six thousand nine hundred eighty-six studies were screened, of which 55 were included in full-text review and 23 selected for inclusion and data extraction. Most papers were theoretical, though some focused on a single disease or disease subset, including: mental health (n = 5), HIV (n = 3), tuberculosis (n = 3), and diabetes (n = 2). Manuscripts included a mix of methodology papers, empirical studies, and other (e.g., narrative) reviews. Authorship of the included literature was skewed toward high-income settings, with 22 of the 23 papers featuring first and senior authors from high-income countries. Of nine empirical studies included, no consistent implementation cost outcomes were measured, and only four could be mapped to an existing costing or implementation framework. There was also substantial heterogeneity across studies in how implementation costs were defined, and the methods used to collect them. CONCLUSION: A sparse but growing literature explores the intersection of implementation science and economic evaluation. Key needs include more research in LMICs, greater consensus on the definition of implementation costs, standardized methods to collect such costs, and identifying outcomes of greatest relevance. Addressing these gaps will result in stronger links between implementation science and economic evaluation and will create more robust and accurate estimates of intervention costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this manuscript was published on the Open Science Framework. It is available at: https://osf.io/ms5fa/ (DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/32EPJ).

Building the health-economic case for scaling up the WHO-HEARTS hypertension control package in low- and middle-income countries.

Generally, hypertension control programs are cost-effective, including in low- and middle-income countries, but country governments and civil society are not likely to support hypertension control programs unless value is demonstrated in terms of public health benefits, budget impact, and value-for-investment for the individual country context. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) established a standard, simplified Global HEARTS approach to hypertension control, including preferred antihypertensive medicines and blood pressure measurement devices. The objective of this study is to report on health economic studies of HEARTS hypertension control package cost (especially medication costs), cost-effectiveness, and budget impact and describe mathematical models designed to translate hypertension control program data into the optimal approach to hypertension care service delivery and financing, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Early results suggest that HEARTS hypertension control interventions are either cost-saving or cost-effective, that the HEARTS package is affordable at between US$ 18-44 per person treated per year, and that antihypertensive medicines could be priced low enough to reach a global standard of an average

En general, los programas de control de la hipertensión son costo-eficaces, incluso en los países de ingresos bajos y medios. Aun así, es poco probable que los gobiernos nacionales y la sociedad civil apoyen los programas de control de la hipertensión a menos que se demuestre su valor en términos de beneficios para la salud pública, impacto presupuestario y valor de la inversión para el contexto individual del país. La Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y la Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS) implementaron la iniciativa HEARTS, un enfoque mundial estandarizado y simplificado para el control de la hipertensión, que incluye los medicamentos antihipertensivos y los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial de preferencia. El objetivo de este estudio es informar sobre los estudios en el ámbito de la economía de la salud relativos al costo de las medidas de control de la hipertensión previstas en HEARTS (especialmente, de los medicamentos), la costo-efectividad y el impacto presupuestario, así como describir los modelos matemáticos diseñados para traducir los datos de este programa en un enfoque óptimo para la prestación y el financiamiento de los servicios de atención de la hipertensión, especialmente en países de ingresos medianos y bajos. Los primeros resultados indican que las intervenciones de HEARTS para el control de la hipertensión son de bajo costo o costo-eficaces, que el conjunto de medidas HEARTS es asequible, a un precio que oscila entre US$ 18 y US$ 44 al año por paciente tratado, y que los medicamentos antihipertensivos podrían tener un precio lo suficientemente bajo como para alcanzar un estándar medio mundial de

Geralmente, os programas de controle de hipertensão são custo-efetivos, inclusive em países de baixa e média renda, mas os governos dos países e a sociedade civil provavelmente não apoiarão tais programas a menos que demonstrem valor em termos de benefícios à saúde pública, impacto orçamentário e retorno sobre o investimento no contexto individual do país. A Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) e a Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde (OPAS) criaram a Global HEARTS, uma abordagem padrão e simplificada ao controle da hipertensão arterial, que inclui medicamentos anti-hipertensivos preferidos e dispositivos para aferição da pressão arterial preferidos. O objetivo deste estudo é relatar os estudos de economia em saúde que analisaram o custo (especialmente custos de medicamentos), custo-benefício e impacto orçamentário do pacote HEARTS para controle da hipertensão e descrever modelos matemáticos elaborados para traduzir os dados do programa de controle de hipertensão em uma abordagem ideal para a prestação e financiamento de serviços de atenção às pessoas com hipertensão, especialmente em países de baixa e média renda. Os primeiros resultados sugerem que as intervenções HEARTS para controle da hipertensão são de baixo custo ou custo-efetivas, que o pacote HEARTS é acessível (custando de US$ 18 a 44 por pessoa tratada por ano) e que o preço dos medicamentos anti-hipertensivos poderia ser baixo o suficiente para atingir uma média global de

Building the health-economic case for scaling up the WHO-HEARTS hypertension control package in low- and middle-income countries

[ABSTRACT]. Generally, hypertension control programs are cost-effective, including in low- and middle-income countries, but country governments and civil society are not likely to support hypertension control programs unless value is demonstrated in terms of public health benefits, budget impact, and value-for-investment for the individual country context. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) established a standard, simplified Global HEARTS approach to hypertension control, including preferred antihypertensive medicines and blood pressure measurement devices. The objective of this study is to report on health economic studies of HEARTS hypertension control package cost (especially medication costs), cost-effectiveness, and budget impact and describe mathematical models designed to translate hypertension control program data into the optimal approach to hypertension care service delivery and financing, especially in lowand middle-income countries. Early results suggest that HEARTS hypertension control interventions are either cost-saving or cost-effective, that the HEARTS package is affordable at between US$ 18-44 per person treated per year, and that antihypertensive medicines could be priced low enough to reach a global standard of an average <US$ 5 per patient per year in the public sector. This health economic evidence will make a compelling case for government ownership and financial support for national scale hypertension control programs.

[RESUMEN]. En general, los programas de control de la hipertensión son costo-eficaces, incluso en los países de ingresos bajos y medios. Aun así, es poco probable que los gobiernos nacionales y la sociedad civil apoyen los programas de control de la hipertensión a menos que se demuestre su valor en términos de beneficios para la salud pública, impacto presupuestario y valor de la inversión para el contexto individual del país. La Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y la Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS) implementaron la iniciativa HEARTS, un enfoque mundial estandarizado y simplificado para el control de la hipertensión, que incluye los medicamentos antihipertensivos y los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial de preferencia. El objetivo de este estudio es informar sobre los estudios en el ámbito de la economía de la salud relativos al costo de las medidas de control de la hipertensión previstas en HEARTS (especialmente, de los medicamentos), la costo-efectividad y el impacto presupuestario, así como describir los modelos matemáticos diseñados para traducir los datos de este programa en un enfoque óptimo para la prestación y el financiamiento de los servicios de atención de la hipertensión, especialmente en países de ingresos medianos y bajos. Los primeros resultados indican que las intervenciones de HEARTS para el control de la hipertensión son de bajo costo o costo-eficaces, que el conjunto de medidas HEARTS es asequible, a un precio que oscila entre US$ 18 y US$ 44 al año por paciente tratado, y que los medicamentos antihipertensivos podrían tener un precio lo suficientemente bajo como para alcanzar un estándar medio mundial de <US$ 5 por paciente al año en el sector público. Estos datos del ámbito de la economía de la salud serán argumentos convincentes para que los gobiernos se involucren en los programas de control de la hipertensión a escala nacional y les brinden apoyo financiero.

[RESUMO]. Geralmente, os programas de controle de hipertensão são custo-efetivos, inclusive em países de baixa e média renda, mas os governos dos países e a sociedade civil provavelmente não apoiarão tais programas a menos que demonstrem valor em termos de benefícios à saúde pública, impacto orçamentário e retorno sobre o investimento no contexto individual do país. A Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) e a Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde (OPAS) criaram a Global HEARTS, uma abordagem padrão e simplificada ao controle da hipertensão arterial, que inclui medicamentos anti-hipertensivos preferidos e dispositivos para aferição da pressão arterial preferidos. O objetivo deste estudo é relatar os estudos de economia em saúde que analisaram o custo (especialmente custos de medicamentos), custo-benefício e impacto orçamentário do pacote HEARTS para controle da hipertensão e descrever modelos matemáticos elaborados para traduzir os dados do programa de controle de hipertensão em uma abordagem ideal para a prestação e financiamento de serviços de atenção às pessoas com hipertensão, especialmente em países de baixa e média renda. Os primeiros resultados sugerem que as intervenções HEARTS para controle da hipertensão são de baixo custo ou custo-efetivas, que o pacote HEARTS é acessível (custando de US$ 18 a 44 por pessoa tratada por ano) e que o preço dos medicamentos anti-hipertensivos poderia ser baixo o suficiente para atingir uma média global de <US$ 18 por paciente por ano no setor público. Estas evidências do campo da economia em saúde serão um argumento convincente para que os governos se responsabilizem por programas de controle de hipertensão em escala nacional e os dotem de recursos financeiros.

Health trends, inequalities and opportunities in South Africa's provinces, 1990-2019: findings from the Global Burden of Disease 2019 Study.

BACKGROUND: Over the last 30 years, South Africa has experienced four 'colliding epidemics' of HIV and tuberculosis, chronic illness and mental health, injury and violence, and maternal, neonatal, and child mortality, which have had substantial effects on health and well-being. Using data from the 2019 Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries and Risk Factors Study (GBD 2019), we evaluated national and provincial health trends and progress towards important Sustainable Development Goal targets from 1990 to 2019. METHODS: We analysed GBD 2019 estimates of mortality, non-fatal health loss, summary health measures and risk factor burden, comparing trends over 1990-2007 and 2007-2019. Additionally, we decomposed changes in life expectancy by cause of death and assessed healthcare system performance. RESULTS: Across the nine provinces, inequalities in mortality and life expectancy increased over 1990-2007, largely due to differences in HIV/AIDS, then decreased over 2007-2019. Demographic change and increases in non-communicable diseases nearly doubled the number of years lived with disability between 1990 and 2019. From 1990 to 2019, risk factor burdens generally shifted from communicable and nutritional disease risks to non-communicable disease and injury risks; unsafe sex remained the top risk factor. Despite widespread improvements in healthcare system performance, the greatest gains were generally in economically advantaged provinces. CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in HIV/AIDS and related conditions have led to improved health since 2007, though most provinces still lag in key areas. To achieve health targets, provincial governments should enhance health investments and exchange of knowledge, resources and best practices alongside populations that have been left behind, especially following the COVID-19 pandemic.

Building the health-economic case for scaling up the WHO-HEARTS hypertension control package in low- and middle-income countries / Argumentos de la economía de la salud para ampliar las medidas de control de la hipertensión de la iniciativa HEARTS de la OMS en los países de ingresos medianos y bajos / Ampliação do pacote de controle da hipertensão OMS-HEARTS em países de baixa e média renda: argumentos a partir da perspectiva da economia em saúde

ABSTRACT Generally, hypertension control programs are cost-effective, including in low- and middle-income countries, but country governments and civil society are not likely to support hypertension control programs unless value is demonstrated in terms of public health benefits, budget impact, and value-for-investment for the individual country context. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) established a standard, simplified Global HEARTS approach to hypertension control, including preferred antihypertensive medicines and blood pressure measurement devices. The objective of this study is to report on health economic studies of HEARTS hypertension control package cost (especially medication costs), cost-effectiveness, and budget impact and describe mathematical models designed to translate hypertension control program data into the optimal approach to hypertension care service delivery and financing, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Early results suggest that HEARTS hypertension control interventions are either cost-saving or cost-effective, that the HEARTS package is affordable at between US$ 18-44 per person treated per year, and that antihypertensive medicines could be priced low enough to reach a global standard of an average <US$ 5 per patient per year in the public sector. This health economic evidence will make a compelling case for government ownership and financial support for national scale hypertension control programs.

RESUMEN En general, los programas de control de la hipertensión son costo-eficaces, incluso en los países de ingresos bajos y medios. Aun así, es poco probable que los gobiernos nacionales y la sociedad civil apoyen los programas de control de la hipertensión a menos que se demuestre su valor en términos de beneficios para la salud pública, impacto presupuestario y valor de la inversión para el contexto individual del país. La Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y la Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS) implementaron la iniciativa HEARTS, un enfoque mundial estandarizado y simplificado para el control de la hipertensión, que incluye los medicamentos antihipertensivos y los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial de preferencia. El objetivo de este estudio es informar sobre los estudios en el ámbito de la economía de la salud relativos al costo de las medidas de control de la hipertensión previstas en HEARTS (especialmente, de los medicamentos), la costo-efectividad y el impacto presupuestario, así como describir los modelos matemáticos diseñados para traducir los datos de este programa en un enfoque óptimo para la prestación y el financiamiento de los servicios de atención de la hipertensión, especialmente en países de ingresos medianos y bajos. Los primeros resultados indican que las intervenciones de HEARTS para el control de la hipertensión son de bajo costo o costo-eficaces, que el conjunto de medidas HEARTS es asequible, a un precio que oscila entre US$ 18 y US$ 44 al año por paciente tratado, y que los medicamentos antihipertensivos podrían tener un precio lo suficientemente bajo como para alcanzar un estándar medio mundial de <US$ 5 por paciente al año en el sector público. Estos datos del ámbito de la economía de la salud serán argumentos convincentes para que los gobiernos se involucren en los programas de control de la hipertensión a escala nacional y les brinden apoyo financiero.

RESUMO Geralmente, os programas de controle de hipertensão são custo-efetivos, inclusive em países de baixa e média renda, mas os governos dos países e a sociedade civil provavelmente não apoiarão tais programas a menos que demonstrem valor em termos de benefícios à saúde pública, impacto orçamentário e retorno sobre o investimento no contexto individual do país. A Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) e a Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde (OPAS) criaram a Global HEARTS, uma abordagem padrão e simplificada ao controle da hipertensão arterial, que inclui medicamentos anti-hipertensivos preferidos e dispositivos para aferição da pressão arterial preferidos. O objetivo deste estudo é relatar os estudos de economia em saúde que analisaram o custo (especialmente custos de medicamentos), custo-benefício e impacto orçamentário do pacote HEARTS para controle da hipertensão e descrever modelos matemáticos elaborados para traduzir os dados do programa de controle de hipertensão em uma abordagem ideal para a prestação e financiamento de serviços de atenção às pessoas com hipertensão, especialmente em países de baixa e média renda. Os primeiros resultados sugerem que as intervenções HEARTS para controle da hipertensão são de baixo custo ou custo-efetivas, que o pacote HEARTS é acessível (custando de US$ 18 a 44 por pessoa tratada por ano) e que o preço dos medicamentos anti-hipertensivos poderia ser baixo o suficiente para atingir uma média global de <US$ 18 por paciente por ano no setor público. Estas evidências do campo da economia em saúde serão um argumento convincente para que os governos se responsabilizem por programas de controle de hipertensão em escala nacional e os dotem de recursos financeiros.

Prioritizing Health-Sector Interventions for Noncommunicable Diseases and Injuries in Low- and Lower-Middle Income Countries: National NCDI Poverty Commissions.

Health sector priorities and interventions to prevent and manage noncommunicable diseases and injuries (NCDIs) in low- and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs) have primarily adopted elements of the World Health Organization Global Action Plan for NCDs 2013-2020. However, there have been limited efforts in LLMICs to prioritize among conditions and health-sector interventions for NCDIs based on local epidemiology and contextually relevant risk factors or that incorporate the equitable distribution of health outcomes. The Lancet Commission on Reframing Noncommunicable Diseases and Injuries for the Poorest Billion supported national NCDI Poverty Commissions to define local NCDI epidemiology, determine an expanded set of priority NCDI conditions, and recommend cost-effective, equitable health-sector interventions. Fifteen national commissions and 1 state-level commission were established from 2016-2019. Six commissions completed the prioritization exercise and selected an average of 25 NCDI conditions; 15 conditions were selected by all commissions, including asthma, breast cancer, cervical cancer, diabetes mellitus type 1 and 2, epilepsy, hypertensive heart disease, intracerebral hemorrhage, ischemic heart disease, ischemic stroke, major depressive disorder, motor vehicle road injuries, rheumatic heart disease, sickle cell disorders, and subarachnoid hemorrhage. The commissions prioritized an average of 35 health-sector interventions based on cost-effectiveness, financial risk protection, and equity-enhancing rankings. The prioritized interventions were estimated to cost an additional US$4.70-US$13.70 per capita or approximately 9.7%-35.6% of current total health expenditure (0.6%-4.0% of current gross domestic product). Semistructured surveys and qualitative interviews of commission representatives demonstrated positive outcomes in several thematic areas, including understanding NCDIs of poverty, informing national planning and implementation of NCDI health-sector interventions, and improving governance and coordination for NCDIs. Overall, national NCDI Poverty Commissions provided a platform for evidence-based, locally driven determination of priorities within NCDIs.

Balancing health and financial protection in health benefit package design.

Policymakers face difficult choices over which health interventions to publicly finance. We developed an approach to health benefits package design that accommodates explicit tradeoffs between improvements in health and provision of financial risk protection (FRP). We designed a mathematical optimization model to balance gains in health and FRP across candidate interventions when publicly financed. The optimal subset of interventions selected for inclusion was determined with bi-criterion integer programming conditional on a budget constraint. The optimal set of interventions to publicly finance in a health benefits package varied according to whether the objective for optimization was population health benefits or FRP. When both objectives were considered jointly, the resulting optimal essential benefits package depended on the weights placed on the two objectives. In the Sustainable Development Goals era, smart spending toward universal health coverage is essential. Mathematical optimization provides a quantitative framework for policymakers to design health policies and select interventions that jointly prioritize multiple objectives with explicit financial constraints.

Household Economic Consequences of Rheumatic Heart Disease in Uganda.

Background: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) has declined dramatically in wealthier countries in the past three decades, but it remains endemic in many lower-resourced regions and can have significant costs to households. The objective of this study was to quantify the economic burden of RHD among Ugandans affected by RHD. Methods: This was a cross-sectional cost-of-illness study that randomly sampled 87 participants and their households from the Uganda National RHD registry between December 2018 and February 2020. Using a standardized survey instrument, we asked participants and household members about outpatient and inpatient RHD costs and financial coping mechanisms incurred over the past 12 months. We used descriptive statistics to analyze levels and distributions of costs and the frequency of coping strategies. Multivariate Poisson regression models were used to assess relationships between socioeconomic characteristics and utilization of financial coping mechanisms. Results: Most participants were young or women, demonstrating a wide variation in socioeconomic status. Outpatient and inpatient costs were primarily driven by transportation, medications, and laboratory tests, with overall RHD direct and indirect costs of $78 per person-year. Between 20 and 35 percent of households experienced catastrophic healthcare expenditure, with participants in the Northern and Western Regions 5-10 times more likely to experience such hardship and utilize financial coping mechanisms than counterparts in the Central Region, a wealthier area. Increases in total RHD costs were positively correlated with increasing use of coping behaviors. Conclusion: Ugandan households affected by RHD, particularly in lower-income areas, incur out-of-pocket costs that are very high relative to income, exacerbating the poverty trap. Universal health coverage policy reforms in Uganda should include mechanisms to reduce or eliminate out-of-pocket expenditures for RHD and other chronic diseases.