RESUMEN
Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common complication of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) and is challenging to treat in lower-resourced settings in which RHD remains endemic. Objective: We characterized demographics, treatment outcomes, and factors leading to care retention for participants with RHD and AF in Uganda. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the Uganda national RHD registry between June 2009 and May 2018. Participants with AF or atrial flutter were included. Demographics, survival, and care metrics were compared with participants without AF. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with retention in care among participants with AF. Results: A total of 1530 participants with RHD were analyzed and 293 (19%) had AF. The median age was 24 (interquartile range 14-38) years. Mortality was similar in both groups (adjusted hazard ratio 1.183, P = .77) over a median follow-up of 203 (interquartile range 98-275) days. A total of 79% of AF participants were prescribed anticoagulation, and 43% were aware of their target international normalized ratio. Retention in care was higher in participants with AF (18% vs 12%, P < .01). Factors associated with decreased retention in care include New York Heart Association functional class III/IV (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30-0.76) and distance to nearest health center (adjusted OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.99). Anticoagulation prescription was associated with enhanced care retention (adjusted OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.24-2.79). Conclusion: Participants with RHD and AF in Uganda do not experience higher mortality than those without AF. Anticoagulation prescription rates are high. Although retention in care is poor among RHD participants, those with concurrent AF are more likely to be retained.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are rising in low-income and middle-income countries, including Malawi. To inform policy-makers and planners on the preparedness of the Malawian healthcare system to respond to NCDs, we estimated NCD service readiness in publicly financed healthcare facilities in Malawi. METHODS: We analysed data from 564 facilities surveyed in the 2019 Harmonised Health Facility Assessment, including 512 primary healthcare (PHC) and 52 secondary and tertiary care (STC) facilities. To characterise service readiness, applying the law of minimum, we estimated the percentage of facilities with functional equipment and unexpired medicines required to provide NCD services. Further, we estimated permanently unavailable items to identify service readiness bottlenecks. RESULTS: Fewer than 40% of PHC facilities were ready to deliver services for each of the 14 NCDs analysed. Insulin and beclomethasone inhalers had the lowest stock levels at PHC facilities (6% and 8%, respectively). Only 17% of rural and community hospitals (RCHs) have liver and kidney diagnostics. STC facilities had varying service readiness, ranging from 27% for managing acute diabetes complications to 94% for chronic type 2 diabetes management. Only 38% of STC facilities were ready to manage chronic heart failure. Oral pain medicines were widely available at all levels of health facilities; however, only 22% of RCHs and 29% of STCs had injectable morphine or pethidine. Beclomethasone was never available at 74% of PHC and 29% of STC facilities. CONCLUSION: Publicly financed facilities in Malawi are generally unprepared to provide NCD services, especially at the PHC level. Targeted investments in PHC can substantially improve service readiness for chronic NCD conditions in local communities and enable STC to respond to acute NCD complications and more complex NCD cases.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Enfermedades no Transmisibles , Humanos , Enfermedades no Transmisibles/terapia , Malaui , Beclometasona , Censos , Instituciones de Salud , Instituciones de Atención Ambulatoria , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de SaludRESUMEN
This Commentary explores the relationship between Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Health Benefits Package (HBP) design to achieve Universal Health Coverage (UHC) in low- and middle-income countries. It emphasizes that while HTA evaluates individual healthcare interventions, HBP reform aims to create comprehensive service sets considering overall population health needs and available resources. Challenges in LMICs include limited local data and technical capacity, leading to reliance on cost-effectiveness estimates from other settings. We suggest a practical approach by combining HTA and HBP elements through a hybrid or compartmentalized method. This approach sets differentiated cost-effectiveness thresholds for specific healthcare platforms or programs (e.g., primary care or essential surgery), aligning priority-setting with organizational considerations, ethics, and implementation strategies. Strong institutions and academic support are vital for evidence-informed priority-setting processes. In summary, HTA can play a pivotal role in designing HBPs for UHC in LMICs, and a compartmentalized approach can enhance priority-setting while considering budget constraints and equity.
Asunto(s)
Países en Desarrollo , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , Humanos , Atención a la Salud , PresupuestosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) affects over 39 million people worldwide, the majority in low-income and middle-income countries. Secondary antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP), given every 3-4 weeks can improve outcomes, provided more than 80% of doses are received. Poor adherence is strongly correlated with the distance travelled to receive prophylaxis. Decentralising RHD care has the potential to bridge these gaps and at least maintain or potentially increase RHD prophylaxis uptake. A package of implementation strategies was developed with the aim of reducing barriers to optimum SAP uptake. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A hybrid implementation-effectiveness study type III was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a package of implementation strategies including a digital, cloud-based application to support decentralised RHD care, integrated into the public healthcare system in Uganda. Our overarching hypothesis is that secondary prophylaxis adherence can be maintained or improved via a decentralisation strategy, compared with the centralised delivery strategy, by increasing retention in care. To evaluate this, eligible patients with RHD irrespective of their age enrolled at Lira and Gulu hospital registry sites will be consented for decentralised care at their nearest participating health centre. We estimated a sample size of 150-200 registrants. The primary outcome will be adherence to secondary prophylaxis while detailed implementation measures will be collected to understand barriers and facilitators to decentralisation, digital application tool adoption and ultimately its use and scale-up in the public healthcare system. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (IRB 2021-0160) and Makerere University School of Medicine Research Ethics Committee (Mak-SOMREC-2021-61). Participation will be voluntary and informed consent or assent (>8 but <18) will be obtained prior to participation. At completion, study findings will be communicated to the public, key stakeholders and submitted for publication.
Asunto(s)
Cardiopatía Reumática , Niño , Humanos , Cardiopatía Reumática/prevención & control , Uganda , Manejo de Caso , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , PolíticaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) is responsible for a significant burden of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and remains the most common cause of acquired heart disease among children and young adults in low-income and middle-income countries. Additionally, the global COVID-19 pandemic has forced the emergency restructuring of many health systems, which has had a broad impact on health in general, including cardiovascular disease. Despite significant cost to the health system and estimates from 2015 indicating both high incidence and prevalence of RHD in South Africa, no cohesive national strategy exists. An updated review of national burden of disease estimates, as well as literature on barriers to care for patients with RHD, will provide crucial information to assist in the development of a national RHD programme. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using predefined search terms that capture relevant disease processes from Group A Streptococcal (GAS) infection through to the sequelae of RHD, a search of PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, Sabinet African Journals, SA Heart and Current and Completed Research databases will be performed. All eligible studies on RHD, acute rheumatic fever and GAS infection published from April 2014 to December 2022 will be included. Vital registration data for the same period from Statistics South Africa will also be collected. A standardised data extraction form will be used to capture results for both quantitative and qualitative analyses. All studies included in burden of disease estimates will undergo quality assessment using standardised tools. Updated estimates on mortality and morbidity as well as a synthesis of work on primary, secondary and tertiary prevention of RHD will be reported. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics clearance is required for this study. Findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and submitted to national stakeholders in RHD. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023392782.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiopatía Reumática , Infecciones Estreptocócicas , Niño , Adulto Joven , Humanos , Cardiopatía Reumática/terapia , Cardiopatía Reumática/prevención & control , Sudáfrica/epidemiología , Pandemias , COVID-19/epidemiología , Infecciones Estreptocócicas/epidemiología , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Costo de Enfermedad , Literatura de Revisión como Asunto , Revisiones Sistemáticas como AsuntoRESUMEN
Generally, hypertension control programs are cost-effective, including in low- and middle-income countries, but country governments and civil society are not likely to support hypertension control programs unless value is demonstrated in terms of public health benefits, budget impact, and value-for-investment for the individual country context. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) established a standard, simplified Global HEARTS approach to hypertension control, including preferred antihypertensive medicines and blood pressure measurement devices. The objective of this study is to report on health economic studies of HEARTS hypertension control package cost (especially medication costs), cost-effectiveness, and budget impact and describe mathematical models designed to translate hypertension control program data into the optimal approach to hypertension care service delivery and financing, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Early results suggest that HEARTS hypertension control interventions are either cost-saving or cost-effective, that the HEARTS package is affordable at between US$ 18-44 per person treated per year, and that antihypertensive medicines could be priced low enough to reach a global standard of an average
En general, los programas de control de la hipertensión son costo-eficaces, incluso en los países de ingresos bajos y medios. Aun así, es poco probable que los gobiernos nacionales y la sociedad civil apoyen los programas de control de la hipertensión a menos que se demuestre su valor en términos de beneficios para la salud pública, impacto presupuestario y valor de la inversión para el contexto individual del país. La Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y la Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS) implementaron la iniciativa HEARTS, un enfoque mundial estandarizado y simplificado para el control de la hipertensión, que incluye los medicamentos antihipertensivos y los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial de preferencia. El objetivo de este estudio es informar sobre los estudios en el ámbito de la economía de la salud relativos al costo de las medidas de control de la hipertensión previstas en HEARTS (especialmente, de los medicamentos), la costo-efectividad y el impacto presupuestario, así como describir los modelos matemáticos diseñados para traducir los datos de este programa en un enfoque óptimo para la prestación y el financiamiento de los servicios de atención de la hipertensión, especialmente en países de ingresos medianos y bajos. Los primeros resultados indican que las intervenciones de HEARTS para el control de la hipertensión son de bajo costo o costo-eficaces, que el conjunto de medidas HEARTS es asequible, a un precio que oscila entre US$ 18 y US$ 44 al año por paciente tratado, y que los medicamentos antihipertensivos podrían tener un precio lo suficientemente bajo como para alcanzar un estándar medio mundial de
Geralmente, os programas de controle de hipertensão são custo-efetivos, inclusive em países de baixa e média renda, mas os governos dos países e a sociedade civil provavelmente não apoiarão tais programas a menos que demonstrem valor em termos de benefícios à saúde pública, impacto orçamentário e retorno sobre o investimento no contexto individual do país. A Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) e a Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde (OPAS) criaram a Global HEARTS, uma abordagem padrão e simplificada ao controle da hipertensão arterial, que inclui medicamentos anti-hipertensivos preferidos e dispositivos para aferição da pressão arterial preferidos. O objetivo deste estudo é relatar os estudos de economia em saúde que analisaram o custo (especialmente custos de medicamentos), custo-benefício e impacto orçamentário do pacote HEARTS para controle da hipertensão e descrever modelos matemáticos elaborados para traduzir os dados do programa de controle de hipertensão em uma abordagem ideal para a prestação e financiamento de serviços de atenção às pessoas com hipertensão, especialmente em países de baixa e média renda. Os primeiros resultados sugerem que as intervenções HEARTS para controle da hipertensão são de baixo custo ou custo-efetivas, que o pacote HEARTS é acessível (custando de US$ 18 a 44 por pessoa tratada por ano) e que o preço dos medicamentos anti-hipertensivos poderia ser baixo o suficiente para atingir uma média global de
RESUMEN
[ABSTRACT]. Generally, hypertension control programs are cost-effective, including in low- and middle-income countries, but country governments and civil society are not likely to support hypertension control programs unless value is demonstrated in terms of public health benefits, budget impact, and value-for-investment for the individual country context. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) established a standard, simplified Global HEARTS approach to hypertension control, including preferred antihypertensive medicines and blood pressure measurement devices. The objective of this study is to report on health economic studies of HEARTS hypertension control package cost (especially medication costs), cost-effectiveness, and budget impact and describe mathematical models designed to translate hypertension control program data into the optimal approach to hypertension care service delivery and financing, especially in lowand middle-income countries. Early results suggest that HEARTS hypertension control interventions are either cost-saving or cost-effective, that the HEARTS package is affordable at between US$ 18-44 per person treated per year, and that antihypertensive medicines could be priced low enough to reach a global standard of an average <US$ 5 per patient per year in the public sector. This health economic evidence will make a compelling case for government ownership and financial support for national scale hypertension control programs.
[RESUMEN]. En general, los programas de control de la hipertensión son costo-eficaces, incluso en los países de ingresos bajos y medios. Aun así, es poco probable que los gobiernos nacionales y la sociedad civil apoyen los programas de control de la hipertensión a menos que se demuestre su valor en términos de beneficios para la salud pública, impacto presupuestario y valor de la inversión para el contexto individual del país. La Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y la Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS) implementaron la iniciativa HEARTS, un enfoque mundial estandarizado y simplificado para el control de la hipertensión, que incluye los medicamentos antihipertensivos y los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial de preferencia. El objetivo de este estudio es informar sobre los estudios en el ámbito de la economía de la salud relativos al costo de las medidas de control de la hipertensión previstas en HEARTS (especialmente, de los medicamentos), la costo-efectividad y el impacto presupuestario, así como describir los modelos matemáticos diseñados para traducir los datos de este programa en un enfoque óptimo para la prestación y el financiamiento de los servicios de atención de la hipertensión, especialmente en países de ingresos medianos y bajos. Los primeros resultados indican que las intervenciones de HEARTS para el control de la hipertensión son de bajo costo o costo-eficaces, que el conjunto de medidas HEARTS es asequible, a un precio que oscila entre US$ 18 y US$ 44 al año por paciente tratado, y que los medicamentos antihipertensivos podrían tener un precio lo suficientemente bajo como para alcanzar un estándar medio mundial de <US$ 5 por paciente al año en el sector público. Estos datos del ámbito de la economía de la salud serán argumentos convincentes para que los gobiernos se involucren en los programas de control de la hipertensión a escala nacional y les brinden apoyo financiero.
[RESUMO]. Geralmente, os programas de controle de hipertensão são custo-efetivos, inclusive em países de baixa e média renda, mas os governos dos países e a sociedade civil provavelmente não apoiarão tais programas a menos que demonstrem valor em termos de benefícios à saúde pública, impacto orçamentário e retorno sobre o investimento no contexto individual do país. A Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) e a Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde (OPAS) criaram a Global HEARTS, uma abordagem padrão e simplificada ao controle da hipertensão arterial, que inclui medicamentos anti-hipertensivos preferidos e dispositivos para aferição da pressão arterial preferidos. O objetivo deste estudo é relatar os estudos de economia em saúde que analisaram o custo (especialmente custos de medicamentos), custo-benefício e impacto orçamentário do pacote HEARTS para controle da hipertensão e descrever modelos matemáticos elaborados para traduzir os dados do programa de controle de hipertensão em uma abordagem ideal para a prestação e financiamento de serviços de atenção às pessoas com hipertensão, especialmente em países de baixa e média renda. Os primeiros resultados sugerem que as intervenções HEARTS para controle da hipertensão são de baixo custo ou custo-efetivas, que o pacote HEARTS é acessível (custando de US$ 18 a 44 por pessoa tratada por ano) e que o preço dos medicamentos anti-hipertensivos poderia ser baixo o suficiente para atingir uma média global de <US$ 18 por paciente por ano no setor público. Estas evidências do campo da economia em saúde serão um argumento convincente para que os governos se responsabilizem por programas de controle de hipertensão em escala nacional e os dotem de recursos financeiros.
Asunto(s)
Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Hipertensión , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Hipertensión , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Hipertensión , Enfermedades CardiovascularesRESUMEN
As the leading cause of death worldwide, cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) present major challenges for health systems. In this study, we analyzed the effects of better population blood pressure control in the context of a proposed 80-80-80 target: 80% of individuals with hypertension are screened and aware of their diagnosis; 80% of those who are aware are prescribed treatment; and 80% of those on treatment have achieved guideline-specified blood pressure targets. We developed a population CVD model using country-level evidence on CVD rates, blood pressure levels and hypertension intervention coverage. Under realistic implementation conditions, most countries could achieve 80-80-80 targets by 2040, reducing all-cause mortality by 4-7% (76-130 million deaths averted over 2022-2050) and slowing the rise in CVD expected from population growth and aging (110-200 million cases averted). Although populous middle-income countries would account for most of the reduced CVD cases and deaths, low-income countries would experience the largest reductions in disease rates.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Cardiovasculares , Hipertensión , Presión Sanguínea , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/epidemiología , Salud Global , Humanos , Hipertensión/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipertensión/epidemiología , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
ABSTRACT Generally, hypertension control programs are cost-effective, including in low- and middle-income countries, but country governments and civil society are not likely to support hypertension control programs unless value is demonstrated in terms of public health benefits, budget impact, and value-for-investment for the individual country context. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) established a standard, simplified Global HEARTS approach to hypertension control, including preferred antihypertensive medicines and blood pressure measurement devices. The objective of this study is to report on health economic studies of HEARTS hypertension control package cost (especially medication costs), cost-effectiveness, and budget impact and describe mathematical models designed to translate hypertension control program data into the optimal approach to hypertension care service delivery and financing, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Early results suggest that HEARTS hypertension control interventions are either cost-saving or cost-effective, that the HEARTS package is affordable at between US$ 18-44 per person treated per year, and that antihypertensive medicines could be priced low enough to reach a global standard of an average <US$ 5 per patient per year in the public sector. This health economic evidence will make a compelling case for government ownership and financial support for national scale hypertension control programs.
RESUMEN En general, los programas de control de la hipertensión son costo-eficaces, incluso en los países de ingresos bajos y medios. Aun así, es poco probable que los gobiernos nacionales y la sociedad civil apoyen los programas de control de la hipertensión a menos que se demuestre su valor en términos de beneficios para la salud pública, impacto presupuestario y valor de la inversión para el contexto individual del país. La Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y la Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS) implementaron la iniciativa HEARTS, un enfoque mundial estandarizado y simplificado para el control de la hipertensión, que incluye los medicamentos antihipertensivos y los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial de preferencia. El objetivo de este estudio es informar sobre los estudios en el ámbito de la economía de la salud relativos al costo de las medidas de control de la hipertensión previstas en HEARTS (especialmente, de los medicamentos), la costo-efectividad y el impacto presupuestario, así como describir los modelos matemáticos diseñados para traducir los datos de este programa en un enfoque óptimo para la prestación y el financiamiento de los servicios de atención de la hipertensión, especialmente en países de ingresos medianos y bajos. Los primeros resultados indican que las intervenciones de HEARTS para el control de la hipertensión son de bajo costo o costo-eficaces, que el conjunto de medidas HEARTS es asequible, a un precio que oscila entre US$ 18 y US$ 44 al año por paciente tratado, y que los medicamentos antihipertensivos podrían tener un precio lo suficientemente bajo como para alcanzar un estándar medio mundial de <US$ 5 por paciente al año en el sector público. Estos datos del ámbito de la economía de la salud serán argumentos convincentes para que los gobiernos se involucren en los programas de control de la hipertensión a escala nacional y les brinden apoyo financiero.
RESUMO Geralmente, os programas de controle de hipertensão são custo-efetivos, inclusive em países de baixa e média renda, mas os governos dos países e a sociedade civil provavelmente não apoiarão tais programas a menos que demonstrem valor em termos de benefícios à saúde pública, impacto orçamentário e retorno sobre o investimento no contexto individual do país. A Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) e a Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde (OPAS) criaram a Global HEARTS, uma abordagem padrão e simplificada ao controle da hipertensão arterial, que inclui medicamentos anti-hipertensivos preferidos e dispositivos para aferição da pressão arterial preferidos. O objetivo deste estudo é relatar os estudos de economia em saúde que analisaram o custo (especialmente custos de medicamentos), custo-benefício e impacto orçamentário do pacote HEARTS para controle da hipertensão e descrever modelos matemáticos elaborados para traduzir os dados do programa de controle de hipertensão em uma abordagem ideal para a prestação e financiamento de serviços de atenção às pessoas com hipertensão, especialmente em países de baixa e média renda. Os primeiros resultados sugerem que as intervenções HEARTS para controle da hipertensão são de baixo custo ou custo-efetivas, que o pacote HEARTS é acessível (custando de US$ 18 a 44 por pessoa tratada por ano) e que o preço dos medicamentos anti-hipertensivos poderia ser baixo o suficiente para atingir uma média global de <US$ 18 por paciente por ano no setor público. Estas evidências do campo da economia em saúde serão um argumento convincente para que os governos se responsabilizem por programas de controle de hipertensão em escala nacional e os dotem de recursos financeiros.
RESUMEN
Policymakers face difficult choices over which health interventions to publicly finance. We developed an approach to health benefits package design that accommodates explicit tradeoffs between improvements in health and provision of financial risk protection (FRP). We designed a mathematical optimization model to balance gains in health and FRP across candidate interventions when publicly financed. The optimal subset of interventions selected for inclusion was determined with bi-criterion integer programming conditional on a budget constraint. The optimal set of interventions to publicly finance in a health benefits package varied according to whether the objective for optimization was population health benefits or FRP. When both objectives were considered jointly, the resulting optimal essential benefits package depended on the weights placed on the two objectives. In the Sustainable Development Goals era, smart spending toward universal health coverage is essential. Mathematical optimization provides a quantitative framework for policymakers to design health policies and select interventions that jointly prioritize multiple objectives with explicit financial constraints.
Asunto(s)
Política de Salud , Cobertura Universal del Seguro de Salud , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , HumanosRESUMEN
Background: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) has declined dramatically in wealthier countries in the past three decades, but it remains endemic in many lower-resourced regions and can have significant costs to households. The objective of this study was to quantify the economic burden of RHD among Ugandans affected by RHD. Methods: This was a cross-sectional cost-of-illness study that randomly sampled 87 participants and their households from the Uganda National RHD registry between December 2018 and February 2020. Using a standardized survey instrument, we asked participants and household members about outpatient and inpatient RHD costs and financial coping mechanisms incurred over the past 12 months. We used descriptive statistics to analyze levels and distributions of costs and the frequency of coping strategies. Multivariate Poisson regression models were used to assess relationships between socioeconomic characteristics and utilization of financial coping mechanisms. Results: Most participants were young or women, demonstrating a wide variation in socioeconomic status. Outpatient and inpatient costs were primarily driven by transportation, medications, and laboratory tests, with overall RHD direct and indirect costs of $78 per person-year. Between 20 and 35 percent of households experienced catastrophic healthcare expenditure, with participants in the Northern and Western Regions 5-10 times more likely to experience such hardship and utilize financial coping mechanisms than counterparts in the Central Region, a wealthier area. Increases in total RHD costs were positively correlated with increasing use of coping behaviors. Conclusion: Ugandan households affected by RHD, particularly in lower-income areas, incur out-of-pocket costs that are very high relative to income, exacerbating the poverty trap. Universal health coverage policy reforms in Uganda should include mechanisms to reduce or eliminate out-of-pocket expenditures for RHD and other chronic diseases.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Rheumatic Heart Disease (RHD) is a disease of poverty that is neglected in developing countries, including South Africa. Lack of adequate evidence regarding the cost of RHD care has hindered national and international actions to prevent RHD related deaths. The objective of this study was to estimate the cost of RHD-related health services in a tertiary hospital in the Western Cape, South Africa. METHODS: The primary data on service utilisation were collected from a randomly selected sample of 100 patient medical records from the Global Rheumatic Heart Disease Registry (the REMEDY study) - a registry of individuals living with RHD. Patient-level clinical data, including, prices and quantities of medications and laboratory tests, were collected from the main tertiary hospital providing RHD care. All annual costs from a health system perspective were estimated in 2017 (base year) in South African Rand (ZAR) using a combination of ingredients and step-down costing approaches and later converted to United States dollars (USD). Step-down costing was used to estimate provider time costs and all other facility costs such as overheads. A 3% discount rate was also employed in order to allow depreciation and opportunity cost. We aggregated data to estimate the total annual costs and the average annual per-patient cost of RHD and conducted a one-way sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: The estimated total cost of RHD care at the tertiary hospital was USD 2 million (in 2017 USD) for the year 2017, with surgery costs accounting for 65%. Per-patient, average annual costs were USD 3900. For the subset of costs estimated using the ingredients approach, outpatient medications, and consumables related to cardiac catheterisation and heart valve surgery were the main cost drivers. CONCLUSIONS: RHD-related healthcare consumes significant tertiary hospital resources in South Africa, with annual per-patient costs higher than many other non-communicable and infectious diseases. This analysis supports the scaling up of primary and secondary prevention programmes at primary health centers in order to reduce future tertiary care costs. The study could also inform resource allocation efforts and provide cost estimates for future studies of intervention cost-effectiveness.
Asunto(s)
Cardiopatía Reumática , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Atención a la Salud , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Humanos , Cardiopatía Reumática/epidemiología , Cardiopatía Reumática/terapia , Prevención Secundaria , SudáfricaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite declines in deaths from rheumatic heart disease (RHD) in Africa over the past 30 years, it remains a major cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality on the continent. We present an investment case for interventions to prevent and manage RHD in the African Union (AU). METHODS: We created a cohort state-transition model to estimate key outcomes in the disease process, including cases of pharyngitis from group A streptococcus, episodes of acute rheumatic fever (ARF), cases of RHD, heart failure, and deaths. With this model, we estimated the impact of scaling up interventions using estimates of effect sizes from published studies. We estimated the cost to scale up coverage of interventions and summarised the benefits by monetising health gains estimated in the model using a full income approach. Costs and benefits were compared using the benefit-cost ratio and the net benefits with discounted costs and benefits. FINDINGS: Operationally achievable levels of scale-up of interventions along the disease spectrum, including primary prevention, secondary prevention, platforms for management of heart failure, and heart valve surgery could avert 74 000 (UI 50 000-104 000) deaths from RHD and ARF from 2021 to 2030 in the AU, reaching a 30·7% (21·6-39·0) reduction in the age-standardised death rate from RHD in 2030, compared with no increase in coverage of interventions. The estimated benefit-cost ratio for plausible scale-up of secondary prevention and secondary and tertiary care interventions was 4·7 (2·9-6·3) with a net benefit of $2·8 billion (1·6-3·9; 2019 US$) through 2030. The estimated benefit-cost ratio for primary prevention scale-up was low to 2030 (0·2, <0·1-0·4), increasing with delayed benefits accrued to 2090. The benefit-cost dynamics of primary prevention were sensitive to the costs of different delivery approaches, uncertain epidemiological parameters regarding group A streptococcal pharyngitis and ARF, assumptions about long-term demographic and economic trends, and discounting. INTERPRETATION: Increased coverage of interventions to control and manage RHD could accelerate progress towards eradication in AU member states. Gaps in local epidemiological data and particular components of the disease process create uncertainty around the level of benefits. In the short term, costs of secondary prevention and secondary and tertiary care for RHD are lower than for primary prevention, and benefits accrue earlier. FUNDING: World Heart Federation, Leona M and Harry B Helmsley Charitable Trust, and American Heart Association.
Asunto(s)
Unión Africana/economía , Inversiones en Salud , Cardiopatía Reumática/prevención & control , África/epidemiología , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Humanos , Modelos Teóricos , Prevención Primaria , Cardiopatía Reumática/mortalidad , Prevención SecundariaAsunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19/provisión & distribución , COVID-19/prevención & control , Disparidades en Atención de Salud , Pandemias/prevención & control , Política , COVID-19/epidemiología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/economía , Humanos , Vacunación Masiva/economía , Vacunación Masiva/organización & administración , Vacunación Masiva/estadística & datos numéricos , Pandemias/economíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) remains endemic in less-resourced regions and countries and results in high medical and non-medical costs to households, health systems, and society. This scoping review maps out the available evidence on the economic impact of RHD and its antecedents and suggests future research priorities. METHOD: We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. We identified articles through systematic electronic database search supplemented by expert knowledge of unpublished literature. Studies were included if they collected empirical RHD-related costing data as a primary or secondary objective and if the data were collected from 2000 onward. Main quantitative findings by intervention, costing perspective, and location were charted, and a standardized quality assessment tool was used to appraise included studies. RESULTS: The index search identified 2519 electronic records and two grey-literature graduate theses. Six full texts were included in the review. Primary prevention costs were modest, while secondary and especially tertiary prevention were more costly. Most estimates were of health sector costs and for tertiary interventions. Only two studies described RHD-related costs in non-high-income countries. Most studies were of adequate methodological quality. CONCLUSION: Research into the costs of RHD has mostly been done in wealthy countries. Costs from the household perspective, which are particularly important in countries with limited public healthcare finance, are lacking. To inform advocacy and guide implementation of the 2018 World Health Assembly resolution on RHD, high-quality, local cost estimates will be needed from a range of representative, RHD-endemic countries.
Asunto(s)
Cardiopatía Reumática , Salud Global , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Humanos , Renta , Prevención Primaria , Cardiopatía Reumática/diagnóstico , Cardiopatía Reumática/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Non-communicable disease (NCD) prevention efforts have traditionally targeted high-risk and high-burden populations. We propose an alteration in prevention efforts to also include emphasis and focus on low-risk populations, predominantly younger individuals and low-prevalence populations. We refer to this approach as "proactive prevention." This emphasis is based on the priority to put in place policies, programs, and infrastructure that can disrupt the epidemiological transition to develop NCDs among these groups, thereby averting future NCD crises. Proactive prevention strategies can be classified, and their implementation prioritized, based on a 2-dimensional assessment: impact and feasibility. Thus, potential interventions can be categorized into a 2-by-2 matrix: high impact/high feasibility, high impact/low feasibility, low impact/high feasibility, and low impact/low feasibility. We propose that high impact/high feasibility interventions are ready to be implemented (act), while high impact/low feasibility interventions require efforts to foster buy-in first. Low impact/high feasibility interventions need to be changed to improve their impact while low impact/low feasibility might be best re-designed in the context of limited resources. Using this framework, policy makers, public health experts, and other stakeholders can more effectively prioritize and leverage limited resources in an effort to slow or prevent the evolving global NCD crisis.