Cost-Effectiveness Studies in the ICU: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Cost-effectiveness analyses are increasingly used to aid decisions about resource allocation in healthcare; this practice is slow to translate into critical care. We sought to identify and summarize original cost-effectiveness studies presenting cost per quality-adjusted life year, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, or cost per life-year ratios for treatments used in ICUs. DESIGN: We conducted a systematic search of the English-language literature for cost-effectiveness analyses published from 1993 to 2018 in critical care. Study quality was assessed using the Drummond checklist. SETTING: Critical care units. PATIENTS OR SUBJECTS: Critical care patients. INTERVENTIONS: Identified studies with cost-effectiveness analyses. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified 97 studies published through 2018 with 156 cost-effectiveness ratios. Reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from -$119,635 (hypothetical cohort of patients requiring either intermittent or continuous renal replacement therapy) to $876,539 (data from an acute renal failure study in which continuous renal replacement therapy was the most expensive therapy). Many studies reported favorable cost-effectiveness profiles (i.e., below $50,000 per life year or quality-adjusted life year). However, several therapies have since been proven harmful. Over 2 decades, relatively few cost-effectiveness studies in critical care have been published (average 4.6 studies per year). There has been a more recent trend toward using hypothetical cohorts and modeling scenarios without proven clinical data (2014-2018: 19/33 [58%]). CONCLUSIONS: Despite critical care being a significant healthcare cost burden there remains a paucity of studies in the literature evaluating its cost effectiveness.

Impact of point-of-care management on the transmission of anogenital gonococcal infections among men who have sex with men in Amsterdam: a mathematical modelling and cost-effectiveness study.

OBJECTIVE: Point-of-care (POC) management may avert ongoing transmissions occurring between testing and treatment or due to loss to follow-up. We modelled the impact of POC management of anogenital gonorrhoea (with light microscopic evaluation of Gram stained smears) among men who have sex with men (MSM) on gonorrhoea prevalence and testing and treatment costs. METHODS: Data concerning costs and sexual behaviour were collected from the STI clinic of Amsterdam. With a deterministic model for gonorrhoea transmission, we calculated the prevalence of gonorrhoea in MSM in Amsterdam and the numbers of consultations at our clinic over 5 years, in three testing scenarios: POC for symptomatic MSM only (currently routine), POC for all MSM and no POC for MSM. RESULTS: Among MSM, 34.7% (109/314) had sexual contacts in the period between testing and treatment, of whom 22.9% (25/109) had unprotected anal intercourse. Expanding POC testing from symptomatic MSM to all MSM could result in an 11% decrease (IQR, 8%-15%) in gonorrhoea prevalence after 5 years and a cost increase of 8.6% (€2.40) per consultation and €86 118 overall (+8.3%). Switching from POC testing of symptomatic MSM to no POC testing could save €1.83 per consultation (6.5%) and €54 044 (-5.2%) after 5 years with a 60% (IQR, 26%-127%) gonorrhoea prevalence increase. Overtreatment was 2.1% (30/1411) with POC for symptomatic MSM only and 4.1% (68/1675) with POC for all MSM. CONCLUSIONS: In the Amsterdam setting, possible abandonment of POC testing of symptomatic MSM because of budget cuts could result in a considerable increase in gonorrhoea prevalence against a reduction in costs per consultation. Expanding POC testing to all MSM could result in a modest reduction in prevalence and a cost increase. While the costs and outcomes depend on specific local characteristics, the developed framework of this study is useful to evaluate POC management in other settings.

Cost-effectiveness of community-based practitioner programmes in Ethiopia, Indonesia and Kenya.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of community-based practitioner programmes in Ethiopia, Indonesia and Kenya. METHODS: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the three programmes were estimated from a government perspective. Cost data were collected for 2012. Life years gained were estimated based on coverage of reproductive, maternal, neonatal and child health services. For Ethiopia and Kenya, estimates of coverage before and after the implementation of the programme were obtained from empirical studies. For Indonesia, coverage of health service interventions was estimated from routine data. We used the Lives Saved Tool to estimate the number of lives saved from changes in reproductive, maternal, neonatal and child health-service coverage. Gross domestic product per capita was used as the reference willingness-to-pay threshold value. FINDINGS: The estimated incremental cost per life year gained was 82 international dollars ($)in Kenya, $999 in Ethiopia and $3396 in Indonesia. The results were most sensitive to uncertainty in the estimates of life-years gained. Based on the results of probabilistic sensitivity analysis, there was greater than 80% certainty that each programme was cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Community-based approaches are likely to be cost-effective for delivery of some essential health interventions where community-based practitioners operate within an integrated team supported by the health system. Community-based practitioners may be most appropriate in rural poor communities that have limited access to more qualified health professionals. Further research is required to understand which programmatic design features are critical to effectiveness.

Costs and cost-effectiveness of community health workers: evidence from a literature review.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to synthesize and critically review evidence on costs and cost-effectiveness of community health worker (CHW) programmes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to inform policy dialogue around their role in health systems. METHODS: From a larger systematic review on effectiveness and factors influencing performance of close-to-community providers, complemented by a supplementary search in PubMed, we did an exploratory review of a subset of papers (32 published primary studies and 4 reviews from the period January 2003-July 2015) about the costs and cost-effectiveness of CHWs. Studies were assessed using a data extraction matrix including methodological approach and findings. RESULTS: Existing evidence suggests that, compared with standard care, using CHWs in health programmes can be a cost-effective intervention in LMICs, particularly for tuberculosis, but also - although evidence is weaker - in other areas such as reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH) and malaria. CONCLUSION: Notwithstanding important caveats about the heterogeneity of the studies and their methodological limitations, findings reinforce the hypothesis that CHWs may represent, in some settings, a cost-effective approach for the delivery of essential health services. The less conclusive evidence about the cost-effectiveness of CHWs in other areas may reflect that these areas have been evaluated less (and less rigorously) than others, rather than an actual difference in cost-effectiveness in the various service delivery areas or interventions. Methodologically, areas for further development include how to properly assess costs from a societal perspective rather than just through the lens of the cost to government and accounting for non-tangible costs and non-health benefits commonly associated with CHWs.

Performance-based financing as a health system reform: mapping the key dimensions for monitoring and evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Performance-based financing is increasingly being applied in a variety of contexts, with the expectation that it can improve the performance of health systems. However, while there is a growing literature on implementation issues and effects on outputs, there has been relatively little focus on interactions between PBF and health systems and how these should be studied. This paper aims to contribute to filling that gap by developing a framework for assessing the interactions between PBF and health systems, focusing on low and middle income countries. In doing so, it elaborates a general framework for monitoring and evaluating health system reforms in general. METHODS: This paper is based on an exploratory literature review and on the work of a group of academics and PBF practitioners. The group developed ideas for the monitoring and evaluation framework through exchange of emails and working documents. Ideas were further refined through discussion at the Health Systems Research symposium in Beijing in October 2012, through comments from members of the online PBF Community of Practice and Beijing participants, and through discussion with PBF experts in Bergen in June 2013. RESULTS: The paper starts with a discussion of definitions, to clarify the core concept of PBF and how the different terms are used. It then develops a framework for monitoring its interactions with the health system, structured around five domains of context, the development process, design, implementation and effects. Some of the key questions for monitoring and evaluation are highlighted, and a systematic approach to monitoring effects proposed, structured according to the health system pillars, but also according to inputs, processes and outputs. CONCLUSIONS: The paper lays out a broad framework within which indicators can be prioritised for monitoring and evaluation of PBF or other health system reforms. It highlights the dynamic linkages between the domains and the different pillars. All of these are also framed within inter-sectoral and wider societal contexts. It highlights the importance of differentiating short term and long term effects, and also effects (intended and unintended) at different levels of the health system, and for different sectors and areas of the country. Outstanding work will include using and refining the framework and agreeing on the most important hypotheses to test using it, in relation to PBF but also other purchasing and provider payment reforms, as well as appropriate research methods to use for this task.

Affordability of an NGO-government partnership for community-based disability rehabilitation.

Background: Tunafasi is a community-based rehabilitation (CBR) programme for persons with disability, implemented by a local non-governmental organisation in Uvira, Democratic Republic of Congo, in partnership with government. To assess affordability and support discussions with the government about continued financing and implementation, Tunafasi representatives commissioned a cost-effectiveness study of the programme's health component. Objectives: This study aimed to estimate the programme's impacts, costs, cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted and affordability of the health component implemented from February 2019 to December 2021. Method: Health-related improvements were assessed for a sample of 511 persons with disability and converted to DALYs averted. Total expenditure during the period February 2019 to December 2021 was estimated from audited financial statements. The cost per DALY averted was estimated by dividing total programme expenditure by the sum of DALYs averted and compared against newly generated, country-specific thresholds to assess affordability. Results: The programme cost $55 729.00 to implement from February 2019 to December 2021 and averted 234 DALYs in 511 persons, at a cost per DALY averted of $224.00. This falls above the affordability threshold of $54.00 - $199.00. Conclusion: While the cost per DALY averted is higher than what thresholds consider affordable for Democratic Republic of Congo, improved engagement from CBR facilitators and greater possibilities for treatment in the post-pandemic era should improve results. Contribution: This new CBR implementation modality offers a possibly affordable solution to African governments struggling to operationalise disability commitments such as United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Testing a Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment Intervention Approach for Addressing Unhealthy Alcohol and Other Drug Use in Humanitarian Settings: Protocol of the Ukuundapwa Chapamo Randomised Controlled Trial.

Refugees and other displaced persons are exposed to many risk factors for unhealthy alcohol and other drug (AOD) use and concomitant mental health problems. Evidence-based services for AOD use and mental health comorbidities are rarely available in humanitarian settings. In high income countries, screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) systems can provide appropriate care for AOD use but have rarely been used in low- and middle-income countries and to our knowledge never tested in a humanitarian setting. This paper describes the protocol for a randomised controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of an SBIRT system featuring the Common Elements Treatment Approach (CETA) to treatment as usual in reducing unhealthy AOD use and mental health comorbidities among refugees from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and host community members in an integrated settlement in northern Zambia. The trial is an individually randomised, single-blind, parallel design with outcomes assessed at 6-months (primary) and 12-months post-baseline. Participants are Congolese refugees and Zambians in the host community, 15 years of age or older with unhealthy alcohol use. Outcomes are: unhealthy alcohol use (primary), other drug use, depression, anxiety and traumatic stress. The trial will explore SBIRT acceptability, appropriateness, cost-effectiveness, feasibility, and reach.

Iraqi primary care system in Kurdistan region: providers' perspectives on problems and opportunities for improvement.

BACKGROUND: As part of a comprehensive study on the primary health care system in Iraq, we sought to explore primary care providers' perspectives about the main problems influencing the provision of primary care services and opportunities to improve the system. METHODS: A qualitative study based on four focus groups involving 40 primary care providers from 12 primary health care centres was conducted in Erbil governorate in the Iraqi Kurdistan region between July and October 2010. A topic guide was used to lead discussions and covered questions on positive aspects of and current problems with the primary care system in addition to the priority needs for its improvement. The discussions were fully transcribed and the qualitative data was analyzed by content analysis, followed by a thematic analysis. RESULTS: Problems facing the primary care system included inappropriate health service delivery (irrational use of health services, irrational treatment, poor referral system, poor infrastructure and poor hygiene), health workforce challenges (high number of specialists, uneven distribution of the health workforce, rapid turnover, lack of training and educational opportunities and discrepancies in the salary system), shortage in resources (shortage and low quality of medical supplies and shortage in financing), poor information technology and poor leadership/governance. The greatest emphasis was placed on poor organization of health services delivery, particularly the irrational use of health services and the related overcrowding and overload on primary care providers and health facilities. Suggestions for improving the system included application of a family medicine approach and ensuring effective planning and monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: This study has provided a comprehensive understanding of the factors that negatively affect the primary care system in Iraq's Kurdistan region from the perspective of primary care providers. From their experience, primary care providers have a role in informing the community and policy makers about the main problems affecting this system, though improvements to the health care system must be taken up at the national level and involve other key stakeholders.

Key Factors Influencing Use of Immunization Cost Evidence in Country Planning and Budgeting Processes: Experiences From Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam.

In many low- and middle-income countries, planning cycles and policy decisions are not always informed by cost evidence, even where relevant and recent cost evidence is available. The Immunization Costing Action Network (ICAN) project was a research and learning community designed to strengthen country capacity to generate immunization cost evidence and to understand and improve the evidence-to-policy linkages for the evidence. We identified key factors that increase the likelihood that health policy makers will use evidence for policy making or planning, which shaped the development of a 6-step evidence to policy and practice (EPP) facilitated process. ICAN used the EPP process in Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam from 2016-2019. The experience resulted in several insights regarding country priorities related to cost evidence and factors that determine uptake. Cost evidence is more likely to be used if it answers a specific policy question prioritized by the immunization program, while the use case is less clear and urgent for routine planning and program management. Nonhealth ministries and subnational stakeholders can provide important perspectives to inform the research and its usability. The use case for evidence should be revisited periodically as divergences from formal planning cycles are common and new policy windows open. Ensuring evidence is available at the right time is critical, even if this requires a sacrifice between rigor and speed. Engaging a small group of stakeholders, rather than an individual, to champion the research may be more effective, and the research has greater legitimacy if it is produced by multidisciplinary country teams. Evidence and messages should be tailored for and packaged targeting different audiences. Going forward, continued support is necessary to bridge the divide between those who generate cost evidence and those who translate evidence for policy and planning decisions.

Cost of Delivering Tetanus Toxoid and Tetanus-Diphtheria Vaccination in Vietnam and the Budget Impact of Proposed Changes to the Schedule.

INTRODUCTION: In 2017, aligned with global World Health Organization tetanus guidelines, Vietnam prepared evidence to support a recommendation to introduce the tetanus-diphtheria (Td) vaccine into routine immunization. This study aimed to provide evidence on the costs and budgetary impact of the potential replacement of the tetanus-toxoid (TT) vaccine with the Td vaccine, considering different possible delivery strategies. METHOD: We used an activity-based ingredients costing approach to estimate the 2017 program costs of providing TT vaccination to girls aged 15-16 years and conducting Td campaigns in outbreak areas. We performed a budget impact analysis for 2018-2025 using the cost per dose estimates based on the current delivery of these vaccines. We assumed complete cessation of TT vaccination of girls aged 15-16 years and a transition period where Td outbreak control campaigns would still occur. Td vaccine was assumed to be provided to children aged 7 years using either facility- or school-based delivery or combined facility- and school-based delivery. RESULTS: The delivery cost per dose for current TT vaccination for girls aged 15-16 years was US$1.49 for school-based delivery, US$1.76 for facility-based delivery, and US$3.86 for delivery via outreach. Td vaccination through campaigns was estimated to cost US$3.56/dose. During 2018-2025, replacing the TT vaccine for girls aged 15-16 years with the Td vaccine for children aged 7 years is estimated to save US$4.61 million in immunization delivery costs if a school-based delivery strategy is used or US$1.04 million if facility-based delivery is used. CONCLUSION: Compared to the current plan, delivery of Td routine vaccination via a school-based strategy was the most cost saving. These results were used in late 2019 to support the delivery of Td vaccination using a school-based delivery strategy for children aged 7 years in 30 Northern provinces in Vietnam.

Reporting gaps in immunization costing studies: Recommendations for improving the practice.

High-quality evidence on the cost of delivering vaccines is essential for policymakers, planners, and donors to ensure sufficient, equitable, predictable, and sustainable financing. However, poor practices and reporting oversights in both the published and grey literature limit the understanding and usability of cost data. This paper describes quality assessment results and quantifies problems with immunization costing study reporting practices found in 68 articles and reports included in an immunization delivery unit cost repository focused on low- and middle-income countries and launched in 2018, the Immunization Delivery Cost Catalogue (IDCC). We recommend a standard of practice for writing up an immunization costing study, in the form of an easy to follow checklist, to increase the quality of reporting and the comparability of results. Reporting that adheres to this checklist will improve the comprehension and interpretability of evidence, increasing the likelihood that costing studies are understood and can be used for resource mobilization and allocation, planning and budgeting, and policy decisions.

Immunization costs, from evidence to policy: Findings from a nationally representative costing study and policy translation effort in Tanzania.

INTRODUCTION: Information on the costs of routine immunization programs is needed for budgeting, planning, and domestic resource mobilization. This information is particularly important for countries such as Tanzania that are preparing to transition out of support from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. This study aimed to estimate the total and unit costs for of child immunization in Tanzania from July 2016 to June 2017 and make this evidence available to key stakeholders. METHODS: We used an ingredients-based approach to collect routine immunization cost data from the facility, district, regional, and national levels. We collected data on the cost of vaccines as well as non-vaccine delivery costs. We estimated total and unit costs from a provider perspective for each level and overall, and examined how costs varied by delivery strategy, geographic area, and facility-level service delivery volume. An evidence-to-policy plan identified key opportunities and stakeholders to target to facilitate the use of results. RESULTS: The total annual economic cost of the immunization program, inclusive of vaccines, was estimated to be US$138 million (95% CI: 133, 144), or $4.32 ($3.72, $4.98) per dose. The delivery costs made up $45 million (38, 52), or $1.38 (1.06, 1.70) per dose. The costs of facility-based delivery were similar in urban and rural areas, but the costs of outreach delivery were higher in rural areas than in urban areas. The facility-level delivery cost per dose decreased with the facility service delivery volume. DISCUSSION: We estimated the costs of the routine immunization program in Tanzania, where no immunization costing study had been conducted for five years. These estimates can inform the program's budgeting and planning as Tanzania prepares to transition out of Gavi support. Next steps for evidence-to-policy translation have been identified, including technical support requirements for policy advocacy and planning.

Producing Standardized Country-Level Immunization Delivery Unit Cost Estimates.

BACKGROUND: To plan for the financial sustainability of immunization programs and make informed decisions to improve immunization coverage and equity, decision-makers need to know how much these programs cost beyond the cost of the vaccine. Non-vaccine delivery cost estimates can significantly influence the cost-effectiveness estimates used to allocate resources at the country level. However, many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) do not have immunization delivery unit cost estimates available, or have estimates that are uncertain, unreliable, or old. We undertook a Bayesian evidence synthesis to generate country-level estimates of immunization delivery unit costs for LMICs. METHODS: From a database of empirical immunization costing studies, we extracted estimates of the delivery cost per dose for routine childhood immunization services, excluding vaccine costs. A Bayesian meta-regression model was used to regress delivery cost per dose estimates, stratified by cost category, against a set of predictor variables including country-level [gross domestic product per capita, reported diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis third dose coverage (DTP3), population, and number of doses in the routine vaccination schedule] and study-level (study year, single antigen or programmatic cost per dose, and financial or economic cost) predictors. The fitted prediction model was used to generate standardized estimates of the routine immunization delivery cost per dose for each LMIC for 2009-2018. Alternative regression models were specified in sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: We estimated the prediction model using the results from 29 individual studies, covering 24 countries. The predicted economic cost per dose for routine delivery of childhood vaccines (2018 US dollars), not including the price of the vaccine, was $1.87 (95% uncertainty interval $0.64-4.38) across all LMICs. By individual cost category, the programmatic economic cost per dose for routine delivery of childhood vaccines was $0.74 ($0.26-1.70) for labor, $0.26 ($0.08-0.67) for supply chain, $0.22 ($0.06-0.57) for capital, and $0.65 ($0.20-1.66) for other service delivery costs. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate immunization delivery costs are necessary for assessing the cost-effectiveness and strategic planning needs of immunization programs. The cost estimates from this analysis provide a broad indication of immunization delivery costs that may be useful when accurate local data are unavailable.

The costs of delivering vaccines in low- and middle-income countries: Findings from a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Information on immunization delivery costs (IDCs) is essential for better planning and budgeting for the sustainability and performance of national programs. However, delivery cost evidence is fragmented and of variable quality, making it difficult for policymakers, planners, and other stakeholders to understand and use. This study aimed to consolidate and summarize the evidence on delivery costs, answering the question: What are the unit costs of vaccine delivery across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and through a variety of delivery strategies? METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of over 15,000 published and unpublished resources from 2005 to 2018 that included IDCs in LMICs. We quality-rated and extracted data from 61 resources that contained 410 immunization delivery unit costs (e.g., cost per dose, cost per fully immunized child). We converted cost findings to a common year (2016) and currency (U.S. dollars) to ensure comparability across studies and settings. We performed a descriptive and gap analysis and developed immunization delivery cost ranges using comparable unit costs for single vaccines and schedules of vaccines. RESULTS: The majority of IDC evidence comes from low-income countries and Sub-Saharan Africa. Most unit costs are presented as cost per dose and represent health facility-based delivery. DISCUSSION: The cost ranges may be higher than current estimates used in many LMICs for budgeting: $0.16-$2.54 incremental cost per dose (including economic, financial, and fiscal costs) for single, newly introduced vaccines, and $0.75-$9.45 full cost per dose (economic costs) for schedules of four to eight vaccines delivered to children under one. CONCLUSIONS: Despite increased attention on improving coverage and strengthening immunization delivery, evidence on the cost of delivery is nascent but growing. The cost ranges can inform planning and policymaking, but should be used with caution given their width and the few unit costs used in their development.

Who benefits from the Obio Community Health Insurance Scheme in Rivers State, Nigeria? A benefit incidence analysis.

BACKGROUND: A key aspect of monitoring and evaluating health programs is ensuring that benefits are reaching their target population. We conducted a benefit incidence analysis (BIA) of a Shell-sponsored community health insurance scheme in Nigeria to determine the extent to which the target group (the poor) was benefitting. METHODS: We examined a sample of 616 patients' hospital attendance, financial and administrative records from 2012-2013. We estimated annual utilization rates and average unit costs for inpatient and outpatient services. We multiplied the two to produce a total cost per patient, then deducted annual out-of-pocket expenditures to estimate the total community-based health insurance scheme benefit per person. Benefits were multiplied by the total number of persons in each socioeconomic group to aggregate benefits. We used concentration curves and dominance tests to determine statistical significance at 5% and 10% levels of significance. RESULTS: Collectively, the poorest 20% of the population received 12% of benefits while the richest quintile received the largest share (23%). Inpatient and outpatient benefits are weakly regressive (pro-rich), statistically significant at a 10% level of significance. CONCLUSIONS: Although the poor were found to benefit, this BIA revealed a tendency towards pro-rich distributions. Removing co-payments for the poorest, reducing long wait and visit times and using community volunteers to help increase access to health services may improve benefits for the poor.