Development and usability of a decision aid to initiate anti-osteoporosis medication treatment in patients visiting the fracture liaison service with a recent fracture.

This study describes the development of a decision aid (DA), aimed at supporting patients in their decision whether to start anti-osteoporosis medication. People with recent fractures or osteoporosis and health professionals were supportive of the DA initiative. An experimental study been started to assess (cost-)effectiveness of the DA. PURPOSE: At fracture liaison services (FLS), patients with a recent fracture ánd osteoporosis or a prevalent vertebral fracture are advised to start anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM). This study describes the development of a decision aid (DA) to support patients and healthcare providers (HCPs) in their decision about whether to start AOM. METHODS: The DA was developed according to International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). A systematic procedure was chosen including scope, design, prototype development, and alpha testing. A previously developed DA for women with osteoporosis was used as a basis. Furthermore, input from literature searches, the Dutch guideline on management of osteoporosis, and from people with a fracture or osteoporosis was used. The updated DA was evaluated during alpha testing. RESULTS: The DA facilitates the decision of patients whether to initiate AOM treatment and provides information on fractures and osteoporosis, general risk factors that increase the likelihood of a subsequent fracture, the role of lifestyle, personalized risk considerations of a subsequent fracture with and without AOM treatment, and AOM options and their characteristics in an option grid. Alpha testing with 15 patients revealed that patient preferences and needs were adequately presented, and several suggestions for improvement (e.g. adding more specific information, simplifying terminology, improving icon use) were accounted for. Participants from the alpha testing recommended use of the DA during outpatient visits. CONCLUSION: Professionals and persons with osteoporosis were supportive of the proposed DA and its usability. The DA could help in a shared decision-making process between patients and HCPs.

Improvement of osteoporosis Care Organized by Nurses: ICON study - Protocol of a quasi-experimental study to assess the (cost)-effectiveness of combining a decision aid with motivational interviewing for improving medication persistence in patients with a recent fracture being treated at the fracture liaison service.

BACKGROUND: Given the health and economic burden of fractures related to osteoporosis, suboptimal adherence to medication and the increasing importance of shared-decision making, the Improvement of osteoporosis Care Organized by Nurses (ICON) study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and feasibility of a multi-component adherence intervention (MCAI) for patients with an indication for treatment with anti-osteoporosis medication, following assessment at the Fracture Liaison Service after a recent fracture. The MCAI involves two consultations at the FLS. During the first consultation, a decision aid is will be used to involve patients in the decision of whether to start anti-osteoporosis medication. During the follow-up visit, the nurse inquires about, and stimulates, medication adherence using motivational interviewing techniques. METHODS: A quasi-experimental trial to evaluate the (cost-) effectiveness and feasibility of an MCAI, consisting of a decision aid (DA) at the first visit, combined with nurse-led adherence support using motivational interviewing during the follow-up visit, in comparison with care as usual, in improving adherence to oral anti-osteoporosis medication for patients with a recent fracture two Dutch FLS. Medication persistence, defined as the proportion of patients who are persistent at one year assuming a refill gap < 30 days, is the primary outcome. Medication adherence, decision quality, subsequent fractures and mortality are the secondary outcomes. A lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis using a model-based economic evaluation and a process evaluation will also be conducted. A sample size of 248 patients is required to show an improvement in the primary outcome with 20%. Study follow-up is at 12 months, with measurements at baseline, after four months, and at 12 months. DISCUSSION: We expect that the ICON-study will show that the MCAI is a (cost-)effective intervention for improving persistence with anti-osteoporosis medication and that it is feasible for implementation at the FLS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial has been registered in the Netherlands Trial Registry, part of the Dutch Cochrane Centre (Trial NL7236 (NTR7435)). Version 1.0; 26-11-2020.

An Updated Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Drugs for Osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Considering the heavy economic burden of osteoporotic fractures, the limits of healthcare resources, and the recent availability of new anti-osteoporosis drugs, there is continuing interest in economic evaluation studies of osteoporosis management strategies. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to (1) systematically review recent economic evaluations of drugs for osteoporosis and (2) to apply an osteoporosis-specific guideline to critically appraise them. METHODS: A literature search was undertaken using PubMed, EMBASE, National Health Service Economic Evaluation database, and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry to identify original articles containing economic evaluations of anti-osteoporosis drugs, published between 1 July, 2013 and 31 December, 2019. A recent European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases-International Osteoporosis Foundation (ESCEO-IOF) guideline for the conduct and reporting of economic evaluations in osteoporosis was used to assess the quality of included articles. RESULTS: The database search retrieved 3860 records, of which 27 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. These studies were conducted in 15 countries; 12 active drugs were assessed, including various traditional pharmacological treatments such as bisphosphonates, raloxifene, strontium ranelate, denosumab, and teriparatide, and new agents such as abaloparatide, romosozumab, and gastro-resistant risedronate. Eight out of 12 studies that compared traditional oral bisphosphonates to other active interventions (denosumab, zoledronic acid, gastro-resistant risedronate, and teriparatide) suggested that the other active agents were generally cost-effective or dominant. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness of sequential therapy has recently been assessed and indications are that it can lead to extra health benefits (larger gains in quality-adjusted life-year). The key drivers of cost effectiveness included baseline fracture risk, drug effect on the risk of fractures, drug cost, and medication adherence/persistence. The current average score for quality assessment was 17 out of 25 (range 2-15); room for improvement was observed for most studies, which could potentially be explained by the fact that most studies were published prior to the osteoporosis-specific guideline. Greater adherence to guideline recommendations was expected for future studies. The quality of reporting was also suboptimal, especially with regard to treatment side effects, treatment effect after discontinuation, and medication adherence. CONCLUSIONS: This updated review provides an overview of recently published cost-effectiveness analyses. In comparison with a previous review, recent economic evaluations of anti-osteoporosis drugs were conducted in more countries and included more active drugs and sequential therapy as interventions/comparators. The updated economic evidence could help decision makers prioritize health interventions and the unmet/unreported quality issues indicated by the osteoporosis-specific guideline could be useful in improving the transparency, quality, and comparability of future economic evaluations in osteoporosis.

Out-of-pocket payments and catastrophic household expenditure to access essential surgery in Malawi - A cross-sectional patient survey.

BACKGROUND: Having to pay out-of-pocket for health care can be prohibitive and even cause financial catastrophe for patients, especially those with low and irregular incomes. Health services at Government-owned hospitals in Malawi are provided free of charge but patients do incur costs when they access facilities and some of them forego income. This research paper presents findings on the direct and indirect expenditure incurred by patients who underwent hernia surgery at district and central hospitals in Malawi. It reports the main cost drivers, how costs relate to patients' household incomes, the financial burden of undergoing surgery and the extent to which hernia patients had recovered and restored their capacity to work and earn an income. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a cross-sectional study design, surveys were held with patients who had undergone hernia surgery in four district and two central hospitals in Malawi. Interviews were conducted by surgically trained clinical officers, trained in survey administration, and included, inter alia, questions about patients' hospital stay, the direct and indirect cost they incurred in accessing surgery, and how they financed the expenditure. Follow-up interviews by telephone were held 8-10 weeks after discharge. RESULTS: The sample included 137 patients from district and 86 patients from central hospitals. The main direct cost drivers were transport and food & groceries. More than three quarters of patients who had their surgery at a district hospital incurred indirect costs, because of income lost due to hospital admission, compared with just over a third among central hospital patients. Median reported income losses were US$ 90 and US$ 71, respectively. Catastrophic expenditure for surgery occurred in 94% of district and 87% of central hospital patients. When indirect costs are added to the out-of-pocket expenditure, it constituted more than 10% of the monthly per capita income for 97% and 90% of the district and central hospital patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: Out-of-pocket household expenditure associated with essential surgery in Malawi is high and in many instances catastrophic, putting households, especially those who are already poor, at risk of further impoverishment. The much needed scaling-up of surgical services in rural areas of Malawi needs to be accompanied by financial risk protection measures.

The cost of providing and scaling up surgery: a comparison of a district hospital and a referral hospital in Zambia.

The lack of access to quality-assured surgery in rural parts of sub-Saharan Africa, where the numbers of trained health workers are often insufficient, presents challenges for national governments. The case for investing in scaling up surgical systems in low-resource settings is 3-fold: the potential beneficial impact on a large proportion of the global burden of disease; better access for rural populations who have the greatest unmet need; and the economic case. The economic losses from untreated surgical conditions far exceed any expenditure that would be required to scale up surgical care. We identified the resources used in delivering surgery at a rural district-level hospital and an urban based referral hospital in Zambia and calculated their cost through a combination of bottom-up costing and step-down accounting. Surgery performed at the referral hospital is ∼50% more expensive compared with the district hospital, mostly because of the higher cost of hospital stay. The low bed occupancy rates at the two hospitals suggest underutilization of the capacity, and/or missing elements of needed capacity, to conduct surgery. Nevertheless, our study confirms that scaling up district-level surgery makes sense, through bringing economies of scale, while acknowledging the need for more comprehensive assessments and costing of capacity constraints. We quantified the economies of scale under different scaling scenarios. If surgery at the district hospital was scaled up by 10, 20 or 50%, the total cost of surgery would increase proportionately less than that, i.e. by 6, 12 and 30%, respectively. If this were to lead to less demand for surgery at the referral hospital, say 10% less surgery, it would result in a reduction of 2.7% in the total cost. Although the health system as a whole would benefit, the referring hospitals would not derive the full economic benefit, unless Government increased resources for district-level surgery.

The Cost of Providing District-Level Surgery in Malawi.

BACKGROUND: Three district hospitals in Malawi that provide essential surgery, which for many patients can be lifesaving or prevent disability, formed the setting of this costing study. METHODS: All resources used at district hospitals for the delivery of surgery were identified and quantified. The hospital departments were divided into three categories of cost centres-the final cost centre, intermediate and ancillary cost centres. All costs of human resources, buildings, equipment, medical and non-medical supplies and utilities were quantified and allocated to surgery through step-down accounting. RESULTS: The total cost of surgery, including post-operative care, ranged from US$ 329,000 per year to more than twice that amount at one of the hospitals. At two hospitals, it represented 16-17% of the total cost of running the hospital. The main cost drivers of surgery were transport and inpatient services, including catering. The cost of a C-section ranged from $ 164 to 638 that of a hernia repair from $ 137 to 598. Evacuations from uterus were cheapest mainly because of the shorter duration of patient stay. CONCLUSION: Low bed occupancy rates and utilisation rates of the operating theatres suggest overcapacity but may also indicate a potential to scale up surgery. This may be achieved by adding surgical staff, although there may be rate-limiting steps, such as demand for surgery in the community or capacity to provide anaesthesia. If a scale-up of surgery cannot be realised, hospital managers may be forced to reduce the number of beds, reorganise wards and/or reallocate staff to achieve better economies of scale.

Does capitation payment under national health insurance affect subscribers' trust in their primary care provider? a cross-sectional survey of insurance subscribers in Ghana.

BACKGROUND: Ghana introduced capitation payment for primary care in 2012 with the view to containing escalating claims expenditure. This shift in provider payment method raised issues about its potential impact on patient-provider trust relationship and insured-patients' trust in the Ghana National Health Insurance Scheme. This paper presents findings of a study that explored insured-patients' perception about, and attitude towards capitation payment in Ghana; and determined whether capitation payment affect insured-patients' trust in their preferred primary care provider and the National Health Insurance Scheme in general. METHODS: We adopted a survey design for the study. We administered closed-ended questionnaires to collect data from insurance card-bearing members aged 18 years and above. We performed both descriptive statistics to determine proportions of observations relating to the variables of interest and chi-square test statistics to determine differences within gender and setting. RESULTS: Sixty-nine per cent (69 %) out of 344 of respondents selected hospital level of care as their primary care provider. The two most important motivations for the choice of a provider were proximity in terms of geographical access (40 %) and perceived quality of care (38 %). Eighty-eight per cent (88 %) rated their trust in their provider as (very) high. Eighty-two per cent (82 %) actively selected their providers. Eighty-eight per cent (88 %) had no intention to switch provider. A majority (91 %) would renew their membership when it expires. Female respondents (91 %; n = 281) were more likely to renew their membership than males (87 %; n = 63). Notwithstanding capitation payment experience, 81 % of respondents would recommend to their peers to enrol with the NHIS with rural dwellers (87 %; n = 156) being more likely to do so than urban dwellers (76 %; n = 188). Almost all respondents (92 %) rated the NHIS as (very) good. CONCLUSION: Health Insurance subscribers in Ghana have high trust in their primary care provider giving them quality care under capitation payment despite their negative attitude towards capitation payment. They are guided by proximity and quality of care considerations in their choice of provider. The NHIA would, however, have to address itself to the negative perceptions about the capitation payment policy.