Stroke resource utilisation and all-cause mortality in Thailand 2017-2020: A retrospective, cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine resource utilisation, costs and all-cause mortality related to stroke in Thailand. DESIGN: Retrospective, cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients with first-ever stroke in the Thai national claims database between 2017 and 2020 were included for analysis. No individuals were involved. METHODS: We estimated annual treatment costs using two-part models. Survival analysis for all-cause mortality was performed. RESULTS: We identified 386 484 patients with incident stroke of which 56% were men. Mean age was 65 years and ischaemic stroke was the most common subtype. Mean annual cost per patient was 37 179 Thai Baht (95% CI: 36 988 to 37 370). Haemorrhagic stroke was predominantly observed in the youngest age groups with the highest estimated mean annual cost. Patients with haemorrhagic stroke also had a longer length of stay (LOS) in hospital and an increased risk of mortality. Key cost drivers were identified to be age, LOS, comorbidity and thrombolysis. Costs were lower in patients who received rehabilitation; however, only 32% of patients received rehabilitation services. The 4-year survival rate of all stroke types was 66.5% (95% CI: 64.3% to 66.7%). Older age, high comorbidity score, long LOS and being treated outside the Bangkok area were factors associated with significantly increased mortality risk, while receiving thrombolysis or rehabilitation was associated with a decreased risk of death. CONCLUSION: The highest mean cost per patient was found in patients with haemorrhagic stroke. Receiving rehabilitation was associated with lower cost and mortality risk. Rehabilitation and disability outcomes should be improved to ensure an enhancement of health outcomes and efficient use of resources.

Availability of stroke services and hospital facilities at different hospital levels in Thailand: a cross-sectional survey study.

BACKGROUND: Stroke has one of the biggest burden of disease in Thailand and all health regions have been tasked to develop their service delivery to achieve the national key performance indicators set out by the Thai service plan strategy 2018-2022. Our aim was to characterise stroke services and hospital facilities by investigating differences in facilities across different hospital levels in Thailand. METHODS: Self-complete questionnaires were distributed to 119 hospitals in 12 health regions between November-December 2019. Participants were health professionals whose main responsibilities are related to stroke service provision in their hospital. Descriptive statistics were used to report differences of stroke service provision between advanced-level, standard-level and mid-level referral hospitals. RESULTS: Thirty-eight (32% response rate) completed questionnaires were returned. All advanced-level, standard-level (100%) and 55% of mid-level referral hospitals provided stroke units. Neurologists were available in advanced-level (100%) and standard-level referral hospitals (50%). Standard-level and mid-level referral hospitals only had a quarter of rehabilitation physicians compared to advanced-level referral hospital. Home-based rehabilitation was provided at 100% in mid-level but only at 16% and 50% in advanced-level and standard-level referral hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Setting up a stroke unit, as a national goal that was set out in the service plan strategy 2018-2022, was achieved fully (100%) in advanced-level and standard-level referral hospitals including key essential supportive components. However, capacity in hospitals was found to be limited and stroke service delivery needs to be improved especially at mid-level referral hospitals. This should include regular organisational surveys and the use of electronic records to facilitate monitoring of clinical/health outcomes of patients.

Health Technology Assessment in Thailand: Institutionalization and Contribution to Healthcare Decision Making: Review of Literature.

OBJECTIVES: To explore health technology assessment (HTA) in Thailand focusing on its institutionalization, key elements for HTA introduction, and HTA contribution to policy. METHODS: A review of literature covered a wide range of topics, including the institutionalization of HTA, elements of HTA introduction, and the role of HTA in policy decision making in Thai context. Additional information from the authors' involvement in the policy decision-making process in Thailand was also considered. RESULTS: HTA institutionalization comprises processes of introducing HTA, including evidence generation and use in policymaking, building capacity of HTA practitioners, organizations, system infrastructure, and collaborations. In Thailand, HTA has been formally integrated into coverage decisions, including in the development of the National List of Essential Medicines and the Universal Health Coverage Scheme benefits package. Contributing factors included political will and leadership, capacity building on HTA-related disciplines, adequate resources, technical expertise, and data. Conversely, challenges faced included the absence of a governing body and strategic plan for HTA systems development, a lack of formal mechanisms for mobilizing financial support, an inadequate number of HTA researchers in nonprofit institutes, and the rise in advanced biotechnologies. CONCLUSIONS: HTA plays an important role in evidence-based healthcare decision making. However, key elements of HTA institutionalization need to be strengthened, especially governance structure and policy for HTA systems development, building and retaining capacity of HTA practitioners to meet demand, addressing the challenges of complex and highly innovative health interventions. Lessons learned from the Thai experience may be used as guidance for HTA institutionalization in other developing countries.

Selecting topic areas for developing quality standards in a resource-limited setting.

Variation in practices of and access to health promotion and disease prevention (P&P) across geographical areas have been studied in Thailand as well as other healthcare settings. The implementation of quality standards (QS)-a concise set of evidence-informed quality statements designed to drive and measure priority quality improvements-can be an option to solve the problem. This paper aims to provide an overview of the priority setting process of topic areas for developing QS and describes the criteria used. Topic selection consisted of an iterative process involving several steps and relevant stakeholders. Review of existing documents on the principles and criteria used for prioritising health technology assessment topics were performed. Problems with healthcare services were reviewed, and stakeholder consultation meetings were conducted to discuss current problems and comment on the proposed prioritisation criteria. Topics were then prioritised based on both empirical evidence derived from literature review and stakeholders' experiences through a deliberative process. Preterm birth, pre-eclampsia and postpartum haemorrhage were selected. The three health problems had significant disease burden; were prevalent among pregnant women in Thailand; led to high mortality and morbidity in mothers and children and caused variation in the practices and service uptake at health facilities. Having agreed-on criteria is one of the important elements of the priority setting process. The criteria should be discussed and refined with various stakeholders. Moreover, key stakeholders, especially the implementers of QS initiative, should be engaged in a constructive way and should be encouraged to actively participate and contribute significantly in the process.

A real-world study of effectiveness of intravitreal bevacizumab and ranibizumab injection for treating retinal diseases in Thailand.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effectiveness of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) and intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) in actual practice for treating patients with retinal diseases in Thailand. METHODS: A prospective, multi-centre, observational study was conducted among eight hospitals in their ophthalmology outpatient departments. Participants consisted of patients who had previously not received any IVB or IVR treatment between 2013 and 2014. The primary outcome measurement was the change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at the end of the follow-up period compared to baseline. RESULTS: There were 1629 treatment-naïve patients for the pro re nata (PRN) treatment pattern and 226 treatment-naive patients for the three-injections (3Inj) treatment pattern. BCVA improvements were found in 35% of the PRN group and 47% of the 3Inj group; however, it was not clinically meaningful between the IVB and IVR groups (P-value = 0.568 for PRN, P-value = 0.103 for 3Inj). A multivariable logistic regression (using the propensity score) showed that positive factors associated with vision improvement for the PRN pattern were the number of drug injections, having retinal vein occlusion, and under 60 years of age, while good BCVA at baseline was a negative predictive factor. For the 3Inj pattern, under 60 years of age and baseline BCVA were statistically significant predictors. Nonetheless, diabetes mellitus (DM) without other comorbidities was a statistically significant predictor of low response to vision improvement compared to DM with other comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: This study was the first observational, prospective study to evaluate the real-life effectiveness of IVB and IVR in Thailand. The majority of participants who used IVB or IVR showed improvements in BCVA after treatment. Further evaluation such as long-term follow-ups and subsequent comparison of effectiveness between IVB and IVR should be investigated due to the limited sample of IVR patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Thai Clinical Trial Registry TCTR20141002001 . Registered 02 October 2014 (retrospectively registered).

Correction to: Real-World Safety of Intravitreal Bevacizumab and Ranibizumab Treatments for Retinal Diseases in Thailand: A Prospective Observational Study.

The Open Access license, which previously read.

Real-World Safety of Intravitreal Bevacizumab and Ranibizumab Treatments for Retinal Diseases in Thailand: A Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: There is very limited evidence examining serious systemic adverse events (SSAEs) and post-injection endophthalmitis of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) and intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) treatments in Thailand and low- and middle-income countries. Moreover, findings from the existing trials might have limited generalizability to certain populations and rare SSAEs. OBJECTIVES: This prospective observational study aimed to assess and compare the safety profiles of IVB and IVR in patients with retinal diseases in Thailand. METHODS: Between 2013 and 2015, 6354 patients eligible for IVB or IVR were recruited from eight hospitals. Main outcomes measures were prevalence and risk of SSAEs, mortality, and endophthalmitis during the 6-month follow-up period. RESULTS: In the IVB and IVR groups, 94 and 6% of patients participated, respectively. The rates of outcomes in the IVB group were slightly greater than in the IVR group. All-cause mortality rates in the IVB and IVR groups were 1.10 and 0.53%, respectively. Prevalence rates of endophthalmitis and non-fatal strokes in the IVB group were 0.04% of 16,421 injections and 0.27% of 5975 patients, respectively, whereas none of these events were identified in the IVR group. There were no differences between the two groups in the risks of mortality, arteriothrombotic events (ATE), and non-fatal heart failure (HF). Adjustment for potential confounding factors and selection bias using multivariable models for time-to-event outcomes and propensity scores did not alter the results. CONCLUSIONS: The rates of SAEs in both groups were low. The IVB and IVR treatments were not associated with significant risks of mortality, ATE, and non-fatal HF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Thai Clinical Trial Registry identifier TCTR20141002001.

Towards the introduction of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines in Bhutan: A cost-utility analysis to determine the optimal policy option.

BACKGROUND: Due to competing health priorities and limited resources, many low-income countries, even those with a high disease burden, are not able to introduce pneumococcal conjugate vaccines. OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-utility of 10- and 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV10 and PCV13) compared to no vaccination in Bhutan. METHODS: A model-based cost-utility analysis was performed in the Bhutanese context using a government perspective. A Markov simulation model with one-year cycle length was used to estimate the costs and outcomes of three options: PCV10, PCV13 and no PCV programmes for a lifetime horizon. A discount rate of 3% per annum was applied. Results are presented using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in United State Dollar per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained (USD 1 = Ngultrum 65). A one-way sensitivity analysis and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis were conducted to assess uncertainty. RESULTS: Compared to no vaccination, PCV10 and PCV13 gained 0.0006 and 0.0007 QALYs with additional lifetime costs of USD 0.02 and USD 0.03 per person, respectively. PCV10 and PCV13 generated ICERs of USD 36 and USD 40 per QALY gained compared to no vaccination. In addition, PCV13 produced an ICER of USD 92 compared with PCV10. When including PCV into the Expanded Programme on Immunization, the total 5-year budgetary requirement is anticipated to increase to USD. 3.77 million for PCV10 and USD 3.75 million for PCV13. Moreover, the full-time equivalent (FTE) of one health assistant would increase by 2.0 per year while the FTE of other health workers can be reduced each year, particularly of specialist (0.6-1.1 FTE) and nurse (1-1.6 FTE). CONCLUSION: At the suggested threshold of 1xGDP per capita equivalent to USD 2708, both PCVs are cost-effective in Bhutan and we recommend that they be included in the routine immunization programme.

One Step Back, Two Steps Forward: An Economic Evaluation of the PEN Program in Indonesia.

Abstract-The economic and health burden of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) is significant globally. To counteract this problem, the World Health Organization (WHO) introduced the Package of Essential Noncommunicable disease (PEN) interventions. Several countries, including Indonesia, implemented the PEN program. To assess the value of the investment in the current program, an economic evaluation of the program was conducted with collaboration between the Ministry of Health in Indonesia, the WHO, and the International Decision Support Initiative (iDSI). Even in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) such as Indonesia where there is lack of data and health technology assessment (HTA) expertise, the study aims not only to inform policy but to build HTA capacity in the country through the working partnership between international HTA experts and local partners. This study evaluated the delivery of screening and treatment for diabetes and hypertension, which are part of NCD interventions in the PEN program. Several screening strategies were compared to explore the options for improving the current PEN program. The findings show that implementing the PEN program is better than a base case of no policy in place, though it can be improved through a targeted screening policy of high-risk groups of population aged 40 and above (as opposed to screening for 15 years old and above as is the current practice). Adopting the recommended policy is a major challenge to policy makers due to a potential negative public perception of the disinvestment from an option that yields higher health outcomes. However, this study demonstrates that with the same budget currently invested in the program, the changes proposed will result in improvements on the current low uptake and poor coverage, thus yielding cost savings for the government and a possibility to reallocate resources to the country's priority health concerns, consequently leading to better health outcomes.

Cost analysis for reimbursement-rate setting of hospital pharmaceutical services in Thailand.

OBJECTIVES This study aimed to develop a hospital pharmaceutical service model, together with a costing template for unit cost analysis and to analyse unit costs of hospital pharmaceutical services. METHODS The study was designed on the basis of activity-based costing. A model of the services was set up by consensus of the working group. Pharmaceutical services among the study hospitals were standardised. A Microsoft Excel-based costing template was developed. Finally, the costing template was used for the unit cost analysis. Sensitivity analysis and descriptive statistics were used for further analysis. KEY FINDINGS Four general and seven regional hospitals participated in the study. Hospital pharmaceutical services were divided into nine supporting activities and nine patient-service activities. Unit costs of drug dispensing per prescription by regional hospitals were approximately double that of general hospitals. In contrast, the cost of aseptic dispensing per item in regional hospitals was lower than those in general hospitals. In comparing the unit costs from standard labour costs with those from actual labour costs, both increases and decreases were found. CONCLUSIONS Costing and the use of Microsoft Excel can be applied to the development of a costing template for unit cost analysis of hospital pharmaceutical services. This programme can provide accurate unit costs for services. The results can be used when considering pharmacy service reimbursement, efficiency and service development.