An overview of the perspectives used in health economic evaluations.

The term 'perspective' in the context of economic evaluations and costing studies in healthcare refers to the viewpoint that an analyst has adopted to define the types of costs and outcomes to consider in their studies. However, there are currently notable variations in terms of methodological recommendations, definitions, and applications of different perspectives, depending on the objective or intended user of the study. This can make it a complex area for stakeholders when interpreting these studies. Consequently, there is a need for a comprehensive overview regarding the different types of perspectives employed in such analyses, along with the corresponding implications of their use. This is particularly important, in the context of low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), where practical guidelines may be less well-established and infrastructure for conducting economic evaluations may be more limited. This article addresses this gap by summarising the main types of perspectives commonly found in the literature to a broad audience (namely the patient, payer, health care providers, healthcare sector, health system, and societal perspectives), providing their most established definitions and outlining the corresponding implications of their uses in health economic studies, with examples particularly from LMIC settings. We then discuss important considerations when selecting the perspective and present key arguments to consider when deciding whether the societal perspective should be used. We conclude that there is no one-size-fits-all answer to what perspective should be used and the perspective chosen will be influenced by the context, policymakers'/stakeholders' viewpoints, resource/data availability, and intended use of the analysis. Moving forward, considering the ongoing issues regarding the variation in terminology and practice in this area, we urge that more standardised definitions of the different perspectives and the boundaries between them are further developed to support future studies and guidelines, as well as to improve the interpretation and comparison of health economic evidence.

An Updated Economic Assessment of Moxidectin Treatment Strategies for Onchocerciasis Elimination.

BACKGROUND: Concerns that annual mass administration of ivermectin, the predominant strategy for onchocerciasis control and elimination, may not lead to elimination of parasite transmission (EoT) in all endemic areas have increased interest in alternative treatment strategies. One such strategy is moxidectin. We performed an updated economic assessment of moxidectin- relative to ivermectin-based strategies. METHODS: We investigated annual and biannual community-directed treatment with ivermectin (aCDTI, bCDTI) and moxidectin (aCDTM, bCDTM) with minimal or enhanced coverage (65% or 80% of total population taking the drug, respectively) in intervention-naive areas with 30%, 50%, or 70% microfilarial baseline prevalence (representative of hypo-, meso-, and hyperendemic areas). We compared programmatic delivery costs for the number of treatments achieving 90% probability of EoT (EoT90), calculated with the individual-based stochastic transmission model EPIONCHO-IBM. We used the costs for 40 years of program delivery when EoT90 was not reached earlier. The delivery costs do not include drug costs. RESULTS: aCDTM and bCDTM achieved EoT90 with lower programmatic delivery costs than aCDTI with 1 exception: aCDTM with minimal coverage did not achieve EoT90 in hyperendemic areas within 40 years. With minimal coverage, bCDTI delivery costs as much or more than aCDTM and bCDTM. With enhanced coverage, programmatic delivery costs for aCDTM and bCDTM were lower than for aCDTI and bCDTI. CONCLUSIONS: Moxidectin-based strategies could accelerate progress toward EoT and reduce programmatic delivery costs compared with ivermectin-based strategies. The costs of moxidectin to national programs are needed to quantify whether delivery cost reductions will translate into overall program cost reduction.

A positive consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic: how the counterfactual experience of school closures is accelerating a multisectoral response to the treatment of neglected tropical diseases.

Global access to deworming treatment is one of the public health success stories of low-income countries in the twenty-first century. Parasitic worm infections are among the most ubiquitous chronic infections of humans, and early success with mass treatment programmes for these infections was the key catalyst for the neglected tropical disease (NTD) agenda. Since the launch of the 'London Declaration' in 2012, school-based deworming programmes have become the world's largest public health interventions. WHO estimates that by 2020, some 3.3 billion school-based drug treatments had been delivered. The success of this approach was brought to a dramatic halt in April 2020 when schools were closed worldwide in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. These closures immediately excluded 1.5 billion children not only from access to education but also from all school-based health services, including deworming. WHO Pulse surveys in 2021 identified NTD treatment as among the most negatively affected health interventions worldwide, second only to mental health interventions. In reaction, governments created a global Coalition with the twin aims of reopening schools and of rebuilding more resilient school-based health systems. Today, some 86 countries, comprising more than half the world's population, are delivering on this response, and school-based coverage of some key school-based programmes exceeds those from January 2020. This paper explores how science, and a combination of new policy and epidemiological perspectives that began in the 1980s, led to the exceptional growth in school-based NTD programmes after 2012, and are again driving new momentum in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This article is part of the theme issue 'Challenges and opportunities in the fight against neglected tropical diseases: a decade from the London Declaration on NTDs'.

Overview of the main methods used for estimating catastrophic health expenditure.

Out-of-pocket payments are expenditures borne directly by an individual/household for health services that are not reimbursed by any third-party. Households can experience financial hardship when the burden of such out-of-pocket payments is significant. This financial hardship is commonly measured using the "catastrophic health expenditure" (CHE) metric. CHE has been applied as an indicator in several health sectors and health policies. However, despite its importance, the methods used to measure the incidence of CHE vary across different studies and the terminology used can be inconsistent. In this paper, we introduce and raise awareness of the main approaches used to calculate CHE and discuss critical areas of methodological variation in a global health context. We outline the key features, foundation and differences between the two main methods used for estimating CHE: the budget share and the capacity-to-pay approach. We discuss key sources of variation within CHE calculation and using data from Ethiopia as a case study, illustrate how different approaches can lead to notably different CHE estimates. This variation could lead to challenges when decisionmakers and policymakers need to compare different studies' CHE estimates. This overview is intended to better understand how to interpret and compare CHE estimates and the potential variation across different studies.

Analyses of the return on investment of public health interventions: a scoping review and recommendations for future studies.

Return on investment (ROI) analysis is increasingly being used for evaluating the value for money of public health interventions. Given its potential role for informing health policies, it is important that there is a more comprehensive understanding of ROI analysis within the global health field. To address this gap in the literature, we conducted a scoping review of recent research articles reporting an ROI metric for a health intervention within the public sector in any country setting. The database search was limited to literature published in English and studies published between 1 January 2018 and 14 June 2021. Uses and settings where the ROI metric is being applied, key methodological features of the calculations and the types of economic benefits included were extracted. 118 relevant studies were included within this scoping review. We found that ROI analyses of health interventions differed between those that only included fiscal savings (such as prevented medical expenses) and those which incorporated a wider range of benefits (such as monetised health benefits). This highlights the variation in the definition of ROI analyses and supports the finding that ROI analyses are used for a range of different research questions/purposes within the healthcare sector. We also found that the methodologies used in ROI calculations were inconsistent and often poorly reported. This review demonstrates that there is notable variation in the methodology surrounding recent ROI calculations of healthcare interventions, as well as the definition of ROI analysis. We recommend that ROI metrics should be carefully interpreted before they are used to inform policy decisions regarding the allocation of healthcare resources. To improve the consistency of future studies, we also set out recommended use cases for ROI analysis and a reporting checklist.

What are economic costs and when should they be used in health economic studies?

Economic analyses of healthcare interventions are an important consideration in evidence-based policymaking. A key component of such analyses is the costs of interventions, for which most are familiar with using budgets and expenditures. However, economic theory states that the true value of a good/service is the value of the next best alternative forgone as a result of using the resource and therefore observed prices or charges do not necessarily reflect the true economic value of resources. To address this, economic costs are a fundamental concept within (health) economics. Crucially, they are intended to reflect the resources' opportunity costs (the forgone opportunity to use those resources for another purpose) and they are based on the value of the resource's next-best alternative use that has been forgone. This is a broader conceptualization of a resource's value than its financial cost and recognizes that resources can have a value that may not be fully captured by their market price and that by using a resource it makes it unavailable for productive use elsewhere. Importantly, economic costs are preferred over financial costs for any health economic analyses aimed at informing decisions regarding the optimum allocation of the limited/competing resources available for healthcare (such as health economic evaluations), and they are also important when considering the replicability and sustainability of healthcare interventions. However, despite this, economic costs and the reasons why they are used is an area that can be misunderstood by professionals without an economic background. In this paper, we outline to a broader audience the principles behind economic costs and when and why they should be used within health economic analyses. We highlight that the difference between financial and economic costs and what adjustments are needed within cost calculations will be influenced by the context of the study, the perspective, and the objective.

An economic evaluation of Wolbachia deployments for dengue control in Vietnam.

INTRODUCTION: Dengue is a major public health challenge and a growing problem due to climate change. The release of Aedes aegypti mosquitoes infected with the intracellular bacterium Wolbachia is a novel form of vector control against dengue. However, there remains a need to evaluate the benefits of such an intervention at a large scale. In this paper, we evaluate the potential economic impact and cost-effectiveness of scaled Wolbachia deployments as a form of dengue control in Vietnam-targeted at the highest burden urban areas. METHODS: Ten settings within Vietnam were identified as priority locations for potential future Wolbachia deployments (using a population replacement strategy). The effectiveness of Wolbachia deployments in reducing the incidence of symptomatic dengue cases was assumed to be 75%. We assumed that the intervention would maintain this effectiveness for at least 20 years (but tested this assumption in the sensitivity analysis). A cost-utility analysis and cost-benefit analysis were conducted. RESULTS: From the health sector perspective, the Wolbachia intervention was projected to cost US$420 per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. From the societal perspective, the overall cost-effectiveness ratio was negative, i.e. the economic benefits outweighed the costs. These results are contingent on the long-term effectiveness of Wolbachia releases being sustained for 20 years. However, the intervention was still classed as cost-effective across the majority of the settings when assuming only 10 years of benefits. CONCLUSION: Overall, we found that targeting high burden cities with Wolbachia deployments would be a cost-effective intervention in Vietnam and generate notable broader benefits besides health gains.

Burden of Postinfectious Symptoms after Acute Dengue, Vietnam.

We assessed predominantly pediatric patients in Vietnam with dengue and other febrile illness 3 months after acute illness. Among dengue patients, 47% reported >1 postacute symptom. Most resolved by 3 months, but alopecia and vision problems often persisted. Our findings provide additional evidence on postacute dengue burden and confirm children are affected.

How can health technology assessment support our response to public health emergencies?

Public health emergencies (PHEs), such as the COVID-19 crisis, are threats to global health and public order. We recommend that countries bolster their PHE responses by investing in health technology assessment (HTA), defined as a systematic process of gathering pertinent information on and evaluating health technologies from a medical, economic, social and ethical standpoint. We present examples of how HTA organizations in low- and middle-income countries have adapted to supporting PHE-related decisions during COVID-19 and describe the ways HTA can help the response to a PHE. In turn, we advocate for HTA capacity to be further developed globally and for increased institutional acceptance of these methods as a building block for preparedness and response to future PHEs. Finally, the long-term potential of HTA in strengthening health systems and embedding confidence and transparency into scientific policy should be recognized.

Direct Medical Costs of Tetanus, Dengue, and Sepsis Patients in an Intensive Care Unit in Vietnam.

Background: Critically ill patients often require complex clinical care by highly trained staff within a specialized intensive care unit (ICU) with advanced equipment. There are currently limited data on the costs of critical care in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). This study aims to investigate the direct-medical costs of key infectious disease (tetanus, sepsis, and dengue) patients admitted to ICU in a hospital in Ho Chi Minh City (HCMC), Vietnam, and explores how the costs and cost drivers can vary between the different diseases. Methods: We calculated the direct medical costs for patients requiring critical care for tetanus, dengue and sepsis. Costing data (stratified into different cost categories) were extracted from the bills of patients hospitalized to the adult ICU with a dengue, sepsis and tetanus diagnosis that were enrolled in three studies conducted at the Hospital for Tropical Diseases in HCMC from January 2017 to December 2019. The costs were considered from the health sector perspective. The total sample size in this study was 342 patients. Results: ICU care was associated with significant direct medical costs. For patients that did not require mechanical ventilation, the median total ICU cost per patient varied between US$64.40 and US$675 for the different diseases. The costs were higher for patients that required mechanical ventilation, with the median total ICU cost per patient for the different diseases varying between US$2,590 and US$4,250. The main cost drivers varied according to disease and associated severity. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the notable cost of ICU care in Vietnam and in similar LMIC settings. Future studies are needed to further evaluate the costs and economic burden incurred by ICU patients. The data also highlight the importance of evaluating novel critical care interventions that could reduce the costs of ICU care.

A refined and updated health impact assessment of the Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis (2000-2020).

BACKGROUND: Lymphatic filariasis (LF) is a neglected tropical disease (NTD). In 2000 the World Health Organization (WHO) established the Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis (GPELF). A key component of this programme is mass drug administration (MDA). Between 2000 and 2020, the GPELF has delivered over 8.6 billion treatments to at-risk populations. The last impact assessment of the programme evaluated the treatments provided between 2000-2014. The goal of this analysis is to provide an updated health impact assessment of the programme, based on the numbers treated between 2000-2020. METHODS: We updated and refined a previously established model that estimates the number of clinical manifestations and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted by the treatments provided by the GPELF. The model comprises three different population cohorts that can benefit from MDA provided (those protected from acquiring infection, those with subclinical morbidity prevented from progressing and those with clinical disease alleviated). The treatment numbers were updated for all participating countries using data from the WHO. In addition, data relating to the estimated number of individuals initially at risk of LF infection were updated where possible. Finally, the DALY calculations were refined to use updated disability weights. RESULTS: Using the updated model and corresponding treatment data, we projected that the total benefit cohort of the GPELF (2000-2020) would consist of approximately 58.5 million individuals and the programme would avert 44.3 million chronic LF cases. Over the lifetime of the benefit cohorts, this corresponded to 244 million DALYs being averted. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that substantial health benefits have resulted from the first 20 years of the GPELF. It is important to note that the GPELF would have both additional benefits not quantified by the DALY burden metric as well as benefits on other co-endemic diseases (such as soil-transmitted helminths, onchocerciasis and scabies)-making the total health benefit underestimated. As with the past impact assessments, these results further justify the value and importance of continued investment in the GPELF.

Human versus equine intramuscular antitoxin, with or without human intrathecal antitoxin, for the treatment of adults with tetanus: a 2 × 2 factorial randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Intramuscular antitoxin is recommended in tetanus treatment, but there are few data comparing human and equine preparations. Tetanus toxin acts within the CNS, where there is limited penetration of peripherally administered antitoxin; thus, intrathecal antitoxin administration might improve clinical outcomes compared with intramuscular injection. METHODS: In a 2  × 2 factorial trial, all patients aged 16 years or older with a clinical diagnosis of generalised tetanus admitted to the intensive care unit of the Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, were eligible for study entry. Participants were randomly assigned first to 3000 IU human or 21 000 U equine intramuscular antitoxin, then to either 500 IU intrathecal human antitoxin or sham procedure. Interventions were delivered by independent clinicians, with attending clinicians and study staff masked to treatment allocations. The primary outcome was requirement for mechanical ventilation. The analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02999815; recruitment is completed. FINDINGS: 272 adults were randomly assigned to interventions between Jan 8, 2017, and Sept 29, 2019, and followed up until May, 2020. In the intrathecal allocation, 136 individuals were randomly assigned to sham procedure and 136 to antitoxin; in the intramuscular allocation, 109 individuals were randomly assigned to equine antitoxin and 109 to human antitoxin. 54 patients received antitoxin at a previous hospital, excluding them from the intramuscular antitoxin groups. Mechanical ventilation was given to 56 (43%) of 130 patients allocated to intrathecal antitoxin and 65 (50%) of 131 allocated to sham procedure (relative risk [RR] 0·87, 95% CI 0·66-1·13; p=0·29). For the intramuscular allocation, 48 (45%) of 107 patients allocated to human antitoxin received mechanical ventilation compared with 48 (44%) of 108 patients allocated to equine antitoxin (RR 1·01, 95% CI 0·75-1·36, p=0·95). No clinically relevant difference in adverse events was reported. 22 (16%) of 136 individuals allocated to the intrathecal group and 22 (11%) of 136 allocated to the sham procedure experienced adverse events related or possibly related to the intervention. 16 (15%) of 108 individuals allocated to equine intramuscular antitoxin and 17 (16%) of 109 allocated to human antitoxin experienced adverse events related or possibly related to the intervention. There were no intervention-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: We found no advantage of intramuscular human antitoxin over intramuscular equine antitoxin in tetanus treatment. Intrathecal antitoxin administration was safe, but did not provide overall benefit in addition to intramuscular antitoxin administration. FUNDING: The Wellcome Trust.

An Introduction to the Main Types of Economic Evaluations Used for Informing Priority Setting and Resource Allocation in Healthcare: Key Features, Uses, and Limitations.

Economic evidence is increasingly being used for informing health policies. However, the underlining principles of health economic analyses are not always fully understood by non-health economists, and inappropriate types of analyses, as well as inconsistent methodologies, may be being used for informing health policy decisions. In addition, there is a lack of open access information and methodological guidance targeted to public health professionals, particularly those based in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings. The objective of this review is to provide a comprehensive and accessible introduction to economic evaluations for public health professionals with a focus on LMIC settings. We cover the main principles underlining the most common types of full economic evaluations used in healthcare decision making in the context of priority setting (namely cost-effectiveness/cost-utility analyses, cost-benefit analyses), and outline their key features, strengths and weaknesses. It is envisioned that this will help those conducting such analyses, as well as stakeholders that need to interpret their output, gain a greater understanding of these methods and help them select/distinguish between the different approaches. In particular, we highlight the need for greater awareness of the methods used to place a monetary value on the health benefits of interventions, and the potential for such estimates to be misinterpreted. Specifically, the economic benefits reported are typically an approximation, summarising the health benefits experienced by a population monetarily in terms of individual preferences or potential productivity gains, rather than actual realisable or fiscal monetary benefits to payers or society.

Are current preventive chemotherapy strategies for controlling and eliminating neglected tropical diseases cost-effective?

Neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) remain a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in many low-income and middle-income countries. Several NTDs, namely lymphatic filariasis, onchocerciasis, schistosomiasis, soil-transmitted helminthiases (STH) and trachoma, are predominantly controlled by preventive chemotherapy (or mass drug administration), following recommendations set by the WHO. Over one billion people are now treated for NTDs with this strategy per year. However, further investment and increased domestic healthcare spending are urgently needed to continue these programmes. Consequently, it is vital that the cost-effectiveness of preventive chemotherapy is understood. We analyse the current estimates on the cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) of the preventive chemotherapy strategies predominantly used for these diseases and identify key evidence gaps that require further research. Overall, the reported estimates show that preventive chemotherapy is generally cost-effective, supporting WHO recommendations. More specifically, the cost per DALY averted estimates relating to community-wide preventive chemotherapy for lymphatic filariasis and onchocerciasis were particularly favourable when compared with other public health interventions. Cost per DALY averted estimates of school-based preventive chemotherapy for schistosomiasis and STH were also generally favourable but more variable. Notably, the broader socioeconomic benefits are likely not being fully captured by the DALYs averted metric. No estimates of cost per DALY averted relating to community-wide mass antibiotic treatment for trachoma were found, highlighting the need for further research. These findings are important for informing global health policy and support the need for continuing NTD control and elimination efforts.

Health economic analyses of the Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis.

The Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis (GPELF) was established by the WHO in 2000. It aims to eliminate lymphatic filariasis as a public health problem. This paper summarises the key estimates of the cost-effectiveness and economic benefits related to the mass drug administration (MDA) provided by the GPELF. Several studies have investigated the cost-effectiveness of this MDA, estimating the cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. These cost-effectiveness estimates have consistently classed the intervention as cost-effective and as favourable compared with other public health interventions conducted in low- and middle-income countries. Studies have also found that the MDA used for lymphatic filariasis control generates significant economic benefits. Although these studies are positive, there are still important gaps that warrant further health economic research (particularly, the evaluation of alternative interventions, further evaluation of morbidity management strategies and evaluation of interventions for settings coendemic with Loa loa). To conclude, health economic studies for a programme as large as the GPELF are subject to uncertainty. That said, the GPELF has consistently been estimated to be cost-effective and to generate notable economic benefits by a number of independent studies.

Towards a fair and transparent research participant compensation and reimbursement framework in Vietnam.

BACKGROUND: Providing compensation for participants in clinical research is well established and while international guidelines exist, defining a context-specific and fair compensation for participants in low-resource settings is challenging due to ethical concerns and the lack of practical, national compensation and reimbursement frameworks. METHODS: We reviewed Oxford University Clinical Research Unit (OUCRU) internal reimbursement documentation over a 10-y period and conducted a scoping literature review to expand our knowledge of compensation and reimbursement practices including ethical concerns. We developed a preliminary reimbursement framework that was presented to community advisory boards (CAB) and clinical investigators to assess its applicability, fairness and transparency. RESULTS: The main topics discussed at the workshops centered on fairness and whether the reimbursements could be perceived as financial incentives. Other decisive factors in the decision-making process were altruism and the loss of caregivers' earnings. Investigators raised the issue of additional burdens, whereas the CAB members were focused on non-monetary elements such as the healthcare quality the patients would receive. All elements discussed were reviewed and, where possible, incorporated into the final framework. CONCLUSION: Our new reimbursement framework provides a consistent, fair and transparent decision-making process and will be implemented across all future OUCRU clinical research in Vietnam.

Economic evaluations of human schistosomiasis interventions: a systematic review and identification of associated research needs.

Background: Schistosomiasis is one of the most prevalent neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) with an estimated 229 million people requiring preventive treatment worldwide. Recommendations for preventive chemotherapy strategies have been made by the World Health Organization (WHO) whereby the frequency of treatment is determined by the settings prevalence. Despite recent progress, many countries still need to scale up treatment and important questions remain regarding optimal control strategies. This paper presents a systematic review of the economic evaluations of human schistosomiasis interventions. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted on 22nd August 2019 using the PubMed (MEDLINE) and ISI Web of Science electronic databases. The focus was economic evaluations of schistosomiasis interventions, such as cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses. No date or language stipulations were applied to the searches. Results: We identified 53 relevant health economic analyses of schistosomiasis interventions. Most studies related to Schistosoma japonicum followed by S. haematobium. Several studies also included other NTDs. In Africa, most studies evaluated preventive chemotherapy, whereas in China they mostly evaluated programmes using a combination of interventions (such as chemotherapy, snail control and health education). There was wide variation in the methodology and epidemiological settings investigated. A range of effectiveness metrics were used by the different studies. Conclusions: Due to the variation across the identified studies, it was not possible to make definitive policy recommendations. Although, in general, the current WHO recommended preventive chemotherapy approach to control schistosomiasis was found to be cost-effective. This finding has important implications for policymakers, advocacy groups and potential funders. However, there are several important inconsistencies and research gaps (such as how the health benefits of interventions are quantified) that need to be addressed to identify the resources required to achieve schistosomiasis control and elimination.

Productivity costs from a dengue episode in Asia: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Dengue is a mosquito-borne viral infection which has been estimated to cause a global economic burden of US$8.9 billion per year. 40% of this estimate was due to what are known as productivity costs (the costs associated with productivity loss from both paid and unpaid work that results from illness, treatment or premature death). Although productivity costs account for a significant proportion of the estimated economic burden of dengue, the methods used to calculate them are often very variable within health economic studies. The aim of this review was to systematically examine the current estimates of the productivity costs associated with dengue episodes in Asia and to increase awareness surrounding how productivity costs are estimated. METHOD: We searched PubMed and Web of Knowledge without date and language restrictions using terms related to dengue and cost and economics burden. The titles and abstracts of publications related to Asia were screened to identify relevant studies. The reported productivity losses and costs of non-fatal and fatal dengue episodes were then described and compared. Costs were adjusted for inflation to 2017 prices. RESULTS: We reviewed 33 relevant articles, of which 20 studies reported the productivity losses, and 31 studies reported productivity costs. The productivity costs varied between US$6.7-1445.9 and US$3.8-1332 for hospitalized and outpatient non-fatal episodes, respectively. The productivity cost associated with fatal dengue episodes varied between US$12,035-1,453,237. A large degree of this variation was due to the range of different countries being investigated and their corresponding economic status. However, estimates for a given country still showed notable variation. CONCLUSION: We found that the estimated productivity costs associated with dengue episodes in Asia are notable. However, owing to the significant variation in methodology and approaches applied, the reported productivity costs of dengue episodes were often not directly comparable across studies. More consistent and transparent methodology regarding the estimation of productivity costs would help the estimates of the economic burden of dengue be more accurate and comparable across studies.

The health and economic burden of podoconiosis in Ethiopia.

BACKGROUND: Podoconiosis is one of the leading causes of lymphoedema-related morbidity in low-income settings, but little is known about the scale of its health and economic impact. This information is required to inform control programme planning and policy. In this study, we estimated the health and economic burden of podoconiosis in Ethiopia. METHODS: We developed a model to estimate the health burden attributed to podoconiosis in terms of the number of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and the economic burden. We estimated the economic burden by quantifying the treatment and morbidity-management costs incurred by the healthcare system in managing clinical cases, patients' out-of-pocket costs and their productivity costs. RESULTS: In 2017, there were 1.5 million cases of podoconiosis in Ethiopia, which corresponds to 172 073 DALYs or 182 per 100 000 people. The total economic burden of podoconiosis in Ethiopia is estimated to be US$213.2 million annually and 91.1% of this resulted from productivity costs. The average economic burden per podoconiosis case was US$136.9. CONCLUSIONS: The national cost of podoconiosis is formidable. If control measures are scaled up and the morbidity burden reduced, this will lead to Ethiopia saving millions of dollars. Our estimates provide important benchmark economic costs to programme planners, policymakers and donors for resource allocation and priority setting.

Programmatic implications of the TUMIKIA trial on community-wide treatment for soil-transmitted helminths: further health economic analyses needed before a change in policy.

School-based deworming programmes are currently the main approach used to control the soil-transmitted helminths (STHs). A key unanswered policy question is whether mass drug administration (MDA) should be targeted to the whole community instead, and several trials in this area have been conducted or are currently on-going. A recent well-conducted trial demonstrated that successful community-wide treatment is a feasible strategy for STH control and can be more effective than school-based treatment in reducing prevalence and intensity of hookworm infection. However, we would argue that it is vital that these findings are not taken out of context or over generalised, as the additional health benefits gained from switching to community-wide treatment will vary depending on the STH species and baseline endemicity. Moreover, community-wide treatment will typically be more expensive than school-based treatment. The epidemiological evidence for an additional benefit from a switch to community-wide treatment has yet to be proven to represent "good value for money" across different settings. Further work is needed before changes in policy are made regarding the use of community-wide treatment for STH control, including comprehensive assessments of its additional public health benefits and costs across a range of scenarios, accounting for the presence of alternative treatment delivery platforms.