Clinical and cost-effectiveness of pessary self-management versus clinic-based care for pelvic organ prolapse in women: the TOPSY RCT with process evaluation.

Background: Pelvic organ prolapse is common, causes unpleasant symptoms and negatively affects women's quality of life. In the UK, most women with pelvic organ prolapse attend clinics for pessary care. Objectives: To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of vaginal pessary self-management on prolapse-specific quality of life for women with prolapse compared with clinic-based care; and to assess intervention acceptability and contextual influences on effectiveness, adherence and fidelity. Design: A multicentre, parallel-group, superiority randomised controlled trial with a mixed-methods process evaluation. Participants: Women attending UK NHS outpatient pessary services, aged ≥ 18 years, using a pessary of any type/material (except shelf, Gellhorn or Cube) for at least 2 weeks. Exclusions: women with limited manual dexterity, with cognitive deficit (prohibiting consent or self-management), pregnant or non-English-speaking. Intervention: The self-management intervention involved a 30-minute teaching appointment, an information leaflet, a 2-week follow-up telephone call and a local clinic telephone helpline number. Clinic-based care involved routine appointments determined by centres' usual practice. Allocation: Remote web-based application; minimisation was by age, pessary user type and centre. Blinding: Participants, those delivering the intervention and researchers were not blinded to group allocation. Outcomes: The patient-reported primary outcome (measured using the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7) was prolapse-specific quality of life, and the cost-effectiveness outcome was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (a specifically developed health Resource Use Questionnaire was used) at 18 months post randomisation. Secondary outcome measures included self-efficacy and complications. Process evaluation data were collected by interview, audio-recording and checklist. Analysis was by intention to treat. Results: Three hundred and forty women were randomised (self-management, n = 169; clinic-based care, n = 171). At 18 months post randomisation, 291 questionnaires with valid primary outcome data were available (self-management, n = 139; clinic-based care, n = 152). Baseline economic analysis was based on 264 participants (self-management, n = 125; clinic-based care, n = 139) with valid quality of life and resource use data. Self-management was an acceptable intervention. There was no group difference in prolapse-specific quality of life at 18 months (adjusted mean difference -0.03, 95% confidence interval -9.32 to 9.25). There was fidelity to intervention delivery. Self-management was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, with an estimated incremental net benefit of £564.32 and an 80.81% probability of cost-effectiveness. At 18 months, more pessary complications were reported in the clinic-based care group (adjusted mean difference 3.83, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 6.86). There was no group difference in general self-efficacy, but self-managing women were more confident in pessary self-management activities. In both groups, contextual factors impacted on adherence and effectiveness. There were no reported serious unexpected serious adverse reactions. There were 32 serious adverse events (self-management, n = 17; clinic-based care, n = 14), all unrelated to the intervention. Skew in the baseline data for the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7, the influence of the global COVID-19 pandemic, the potential effects of crossover and the lack of ethnic diversity in the recruited sample were possible limitations. Conclusions: Self-management was acceptable and cost-effective, led to fewer complications and did not improve or worsen quality of life for women with prolapse compared with clinic-based care. Future research is needed to develop a quality-of-life measure that is sensitive to the changes women desire from treatment. Study registration: This study is registered as ISRCTN62510577. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/82/01) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 23. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Pelvic organ prolapse is a common and distressing condition experienced by large numbers of women. Prolapse is when the organs that are usually in the pelvis drop down into the vagina. Women experience a feeling of something coming down into the vagina, along with bowel, bladder and sexual problems. One possible treatment is a vaginal pessary. The pessary is a device that is inserted into the vagina and holds the pelvic organs back in their usual place. Women who use a vaginal pessary usually come back to clinic every 6 months to have their pessary removed and replaced; this is called clinic-based care. However, it is possible for a woman to look after the pessary herself; this is called self-management. This study compared self-management with clinic-based care. Three hundred and forty women with prolapse took part; 171 received clinic-based care and 169 undertook self-management. Each woman had an equal chance of being in either group. Women in the self-management group received a 30-minute teaching appointment, an information leaflet, a 2-week follow-up telephone call and a telephone number for their local centre. Women in the clinic-based care group returned to clinic as advised by the treating healthcare professional. Self-management was found to be acceptable. Women self-managed their pessary in ways that suited their lifestyle. After 18 months, there was no difference between the groups in women's quality of life. Women in the self-management group experienced fewer pessary complications than women who received clinic-based care. Self-management costs less to deliver than clinic-based care. In summary, self-management did not improve women's quality of life more than clinic-based care, but it did lead to women experiencing fewer complications and cost less to deliver in the NHS. The findings support self-management as a treatment pathway for women using a pessary for prolapse.

The Economic Impact of Atopic Dermatitis.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory disorder that affects over 30 million people in the United States. Given the large and growing prevalence of AD, the associated economic burden is significant. It has been estimated that AD costs over $5 billion dollars annually. These costs include both direct and indirect costs. Direct costs include prescription medicines, visits to health-care providers, hospitalizations, and transportation. Indirect costs include missed days or lost productivity at work or school, career modification, and reduced quality of life. Understanding and measuring these costs can be accomplished through rigorous economic evaluation, which is the organized process of considering inputs and outcomes of various activities. Economic evaluation has been used to contextualize the burden of AD in society. It has also been used to inform patients, providers, and other stakeholders on how to deliver the most evidence-based, efficient way possible. Understanding the economic impact of atopic dermatitis is an important aspect of delivering high-quality care.

Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses of fluoride varnish for caries prevention in Guangxi, China.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of fluoride varnish (FV) interventions for preventing caries in the first permanent molars (FPMs) among children in rural areas in Guangxi, China. METHODS: This study constituted a secondary analysis of data from a randomised controlled trial, analysed from a social perspective. A total of 1,335 children aged 6-8 years in remote rural areas of Guangxi were enrolled in this three-year follow-up controlled study. Children in the experimental group (EG) and the control group (CG) received oral health education and were provided with a toothbrush and toothpaste once every six months. Additionally, FV was applied in the EG. A decision tree model was developed, and single-factor and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: After three years of intervention, the prevalence of caries in the EG was 50.85%, with an average decayed, missing, and filled teeth (DMFT) index score of 1.12, and that in the CG was 59.04%, with a DMFT index score of 1.36. The total cost of caries intervention and postcaries treatment was 42,719.55 USD for the EG and 46,622.13 USD for the CG. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the EG was 25.36 USD per caries prevented, and the cost-benefit ratio (CBR) was 1.74 USD benefits per 1 USD cost. The results of the sensitivity analyses showed that the increase in the average DMFT index score was the largest variable affecting the ICER and CBR. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to oral health education alone, a comprehensive intervention combining FV application with oral health education is more cost-effective and beneficial for preventing caries in the FPMs of children living in economically disadvantaged rural areas. These findings could provide a basis for policy-making and clinical choices to improve children's oral health.

A cost-benefit analysis of mass prostate cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) causes a substantial health and financial burden worldwide, underscoring the need for efficient mass screening approaches. This study attempts to evaluate the Net Cost-Benefit Index (NCBI) of PCa screening in Iran to offer insights for informed decision-making and resource allocation. METHOD: The Net Cost-Benefit Index (NCBI) was calculated for four age groups (40 years and above) using a decision-analysis model. Two screening strategies, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) solely and PSA with Digital Rectal Examination (DRE), were evaluated from the health system perspective. A retrospective assessment of 1402 prostate cancer (PCa) patients' profiles were conducted, and direct medical and non-medical costs were calculated based on the 2021 official tariff rates, patient records, and interviews. The monetary value of mass screening was determined through Willingness to Pay (WTP) assessments, which served as a measure for the benefit aspect. RESULT: The combined PSA and DRE strategy of screening is cost-effective, yields up to $3 saving in costs per case and emerges as the dominant strategy over PSA alone. Screening for men aged 70 and above does not meet economic justification, indicated by a negative Net Cost-Benefit Index (NCBI). The 40-49 age group exhibits the highest net benefit, $13.81 based on basic information and $13.54 based on comprehensive information. Sensitivity analysis strongly supports the cost-effectiveness of the combined screening approach. CONCLUSION: This study advocates prostate cancer screening with PSA and DRE, is economically justified for men aged 40-69. The results of the study recommend that policymakers prioritize resource allocation for PCa screening programs based on age and budget constraints. Men's willingness to pay, especially for the 40-49 age group which had the highest net benefit, leverages their financial participation in screening services. Additionally, screening services for other age groups, such as 50-54 or 55-59, can be provided either for free or at a reduced cost.

Decisional tool development and application for techno-economic analysis of fungal laccase production.

Textile and medical effluents causing bioaccumulation and biomagnification have been successfully biodegraded by fungal laccases. Here, a decision-making tool was developed and applied to evaluate 45 different laccase production strategies which determined the best potential source from a techno-economical perspective. Laccase production cost was calculated with a fixed output of 109 enzymatic units per batch (USD$per109U) and a sensitivity analysis was performed. Results indicate that optimization of enzymatic kinetics for each organism is essential to avoid exceeding the fermentation time point at which production titer reaches its peak and, therefore, higher production costs. Overall, the most cost-effective laccase-producing strategy was obtained when using Pseudolagarobasidium acaciicola with base production cost of USD $42.46 per 109 U. This works serves as platform for decision-making to find the optimal laccase production strategy based on techno-economic parameters.

Cashing in: cost-benefit analysis framework for digital hospitals.

BACKGROUND: For many countries, especially those outside the USA without incentive payments, implementing and maintaining electronic medical records (EMR) is expensive and can be controversial given the large amounts of investment. Evaluating the value of EMR implementation is necessary to understand whether or not, such investment, especially when it comes from the public source, is an efficient allocation of healthcare resources. Nonetheless, most countries have struggled to measure the return on EMR investment due to the lack of appropriate evaluation frameworks. METHODS: This paper outlines the development of an evidence-based digital health cost-benefit analysis (eHealth-CBA) framework to calculate the total economic value of the EMR implementation over time. A net positive benefit indicates such investment represents improved efficiency, and a net negative is considered a wasteful use of public resources. RESULTS: We developed a three-stage process that takes into account the complexity of the healthcare system and its stakeholders, the investment appraisal and evaluation practice, and the existing knowledge of EMR implementation. The three stages include (1) literature review, (2) stakeholder consultation, and (3) CBA framework development. The framework maps the impacts of the EMR to the quadruple aim of healthcare and clearly creates a method for value assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed framework is the first step toward developing a comprehensive evaluation framework for EMRs to inform health decision-makers about the economic value of digital investments rather than just the financial value.

A practical study on the near-zero discharge of rainwater and the collaborative treatment and regeneration of rainwater and sewage.

Non-conventional water recovery, recycling, and reuse have been considered imperative approaches to addressing water scarcity in China. The objective of this study was to evaluate the technical and economic feasibility of Water Reclamation Plants (WRP) based on an anaerobic-anoxic-oxic membrane bioreactor (A2O-MBR) system for unconventional water resource treatment and reuse in towns (domestic sewage and rainwater). Rainwater is collected and stored in the rainwater reservoir through the rainwater pipe network, and then transported to the WRP for treatment and reuse through the rainwater reuse pumping station during the peak water demand period. During a year of operation and evaluation process, a total of 610,000 cubic meters of rainwater were reused, accounting for 10.4 % of the treated wastewater. In the A2O-MBR operation, the average effluent concentrations for COD (chemical oxygen demand), NH4+-N (ammonium), TN (total nitrogen), and TP (total phosphorus) were 14.23 ± 4.07 mg/L, 0.22 ± 0.26 mg/L, 11.97 ± 1.54 mg/L, and 0.13 ± 0.09 mg/L, respectively. The effluent quality met standards suitable for reuse in industrial cooling water or for direct discharge. The WRP demonstrates a positive financial outlook, with total capital and operating costs totaling 0.16 $/m3. A comprehensive cost-benefit analysis indicates a positive net present value for the WRP, and the estimated annualized net profit is 0.024 $/m3. This research has achieved near-zero discharge of wastewater and effective allocation of rainwater resources across time and space.

Cost-benefit analysis of human adenovirus vaccine development in a Korean military setting.

BACKGROUND: Human adenovirus (HAdV) is a prevalent causative agent of acute respiratory disease (ARD) and is frequently responsible for outbreaks, particularly in military environments. Current vaccines do not effectively cover HAdV subtypes commonly found among Korean military personnel, highlighting the need for a new targeted vaccine. This study presents a cost-benefit analysis to evaluate the economic viability of developing and implementing such a vaccine within a military context. METHODS: We adopted a societal perspective for this cost-benefit analysis, which included estimating costs associated with vaccine development, production, and distribution over a projected timeline. We assumed a development period of five years, after which vaccine production and administration were initiated in the sixth year. The cost associated with vaccine development, production, and dispensation was considered. The benefits were calculated based on both direct and indirect cost savings from preventing HAdV infections through vaccination. All financial figures were expressed in 2023 US dollars. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the impact of varying factors such as vaccination rate, incidence of infection, vaccine efficacy, and discount rate. RESULTS: For the base case scenario, we assumed a vaccination rate of 100 %, an incidence rate of 0.02, and a vaccine efficacy of 95 %, applying a 3 % discount rate. Initially, in the sixth year, the benefit-cost ratio stood at 0.71, suggesting a cost disadvantage at the onset of vaccination. However, this ratio improved to 1.32 in the following years, indicating a cost benefit from the seventh year onward. The cumulative benefit-cost ratio over a decade reached 2.72. The outcomes from the sensitivity analysis were consistent with these findings. CONCLUSION: Our cost-benefit analysis demonstrates that the introduction of an HAdV vaccine for the Korean military is economically advantageous, with substantial cost benefits accruing from the seventh year after the commencement of vaccination.

Evaluation of venous thromboembolism risk assessment models for hospital inpatients: the VTEAM evidence synthesis.

Background: Pharmacological prophylaxis during hospital admission can reduce the risk of acquired blood clots (venous thromboembolism) but may cause complications, such as bleeding. Using a risk assessment model to predict the risk of blood clots could facilitate selection of patients for prophylaxis and optimise the balance of benefits, risks and costs. Objectives: We aimed to identify validated risk assessment models and estimate their prognostic accuracy, evaluate the cost-effectiveness of different strategies for selecting hospitalised patients for prophylaxis, assess the feasibility of using efficient research methods and estimate key parameters for future research. Design: We undertook a systematic review, decision-analytic modelling and observational cohort study conducted in accordance with Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines. Setting: NHS hospitals, with primary data collection at four sites. Participants: Medical and surgical hospital inpatients, excluding paediatric, critical care and pregnancy-related admissions. Interventions: Prophylaxis for all patients, none and according to selected risk assessment models. Main outcome measures: Model accuracy for predicting blood clots, lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years associated with alternative strategies, accuracy of efficient methods for identifying key outcomes and proportion of inpatients recommended prophylaxis using different models. Results: We identified 24 validated risk assessment models, but low-quality heterogeneous data suggested weak accuracy for prediction of blood clots and generally high risk of bias in all studies. Decision-analytic modelling showed that pharmacological prophylaxis for all eligible is generally more cost-effective than model-based strategies for both medical and surgical inpatients, when valuing a quality-adjusted life-year at £20,000. The findings were more sensitive to uncertainties in the surgical population; strategies using risk assessment models were more cost-effective if the model was assumed to have a very high sensitivity, or the long-term risks of post-thrombotic complications were lower. Efficient methods using routine data did not accurately identify blood clots or bleeding events and several pre-specified feasibility criteria were not met. Theoretical prophylaxis rates across an inpatient cohort based on existing risk assessment models ranged from 13% to 91%. Limitations: Existing studies may underestimate the accuracy of risk assessment models, leading to underestimation of their cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness findings do not apply to patients with an increased risk of bleeding. Mechanical thromboprophylaxis options were excluded from the modelling. Primary data collection was predominately retrospective, risking case ascertainment bias. Conclusions: Thromboprophylaxis for all patients appears to be generally more cost-effective than using a risk assessment model, in hospitalised patients at low risk of bleeding. To be cost-effective, any risk assessment model would need to be highly sensitive. Current evidence on risk assessment models is at high risk of bias and our findings should be interpreted in this context. We were unable to demonstrate the feasibility of using efficient methods to accurately detect relevant outcomes for future research. Future work: Further research should evaluate routine prophylaxis strategies for all eligible hospitalised patients. Models that could accurately identify individuals at very low risk of blood clots (who could discontinue prophylaxis) warrant further evaluation. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020165778 and Researchregistry5216. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127454) and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 20. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

People who are admitted to hospital are at risk of blood clots that can cause serious illness or death. Patients are often given low doses of blood-thinning drugs to reduce this risk. However, these drugs can cause side effects, such as bleeding. Hospitals currently use complex risk assessment models (risk scores, which usually include patient, disease, mobility and intervention factors) to determine the individual risk of blood clots and identify people most likely to benefit from blood-thinning drugs. There are a lot of different risk scores and we do not know which one is best. We also do not know how these scores compare to each other or whether using scores to decide who should get blood-thinning drugs provides good value for money to the NHS. We reviewed all previous studies of risk scores. We found that they did not predict blood clots very well and we could not recommend one score over another. We then created a mathematical model to simulate the use of blood-thinning drugs in people admitted to hospital. The model suggested that giving blood-thinning drugs to everyone who could have them would probably provide the best value for money, in medical patients. Our findings were the same, but less certain, for surgical patients. We also collected information from four NHS hospitals to explore possibilities for future research. Our work showed that routinely collected electronic data on blood clots and bleeding events is not very accurate and that using different scores could result in variable use of blood-thinning medications. Our findings suggest that it may be better value to the NHS and better for patients if we were to offer blood-thinning medications to everyone on admission to hospital, without using any risk score. However, this approach needs further research to ensure it is safe and effective. Such research would not be able to rely on routine electronic data to identify blood clots or bleeding events, in isolation.

Thermal escape box: A cost-benefit evaluation paradigm for investigating thermosensation and thermal pain.

Thermosensation, the ability to detect and estimate temperature, is an evolutionarily conserved process that is essential for survival. Thermosensing is impaired in various pain syndromes, resulting in thermal allodynia, the perception of an innocuous temperature as painful, or thermal hyperalgesia, an exacerbated perception of a painful thermal stimulus. Several behavioral assays exist to study thermosensation and thermal pain in rodents, however, most rely on reflexive withdrawal responses or the subjective quantification of spontaneous nocifensive behaviors. Here, we created a new apparatus, the thermal escape box, which can be attached to temperature-controlled plates and used to assess temperature-dependent effort-based decision-making. The apparatus consists of a light chamber with an opening that fits around temperature-controlled plates, and a small entryway into a dark chamber. A mouse must choose to stay in a brightly lit aversive area or traverse the plates to escape to the enclosed dark chamber. We quantified escape latencies of adult C57Bl/6 mice at different plate temperatures from video recordings and found they were significantly longer at 5 °C, 18 °C, and 52 °C, compared to 30 °C, a mouse's preferred ambient temperature. Differences in escape latencies were abolished in male Trpm8-/- mice and in male Trpv1-/- animals. Finally, we show that chronic constriction injury procedures or oxaliplatin treatement significantly increased escape latencies at cold temperatures compared to controls, the later of which was prevented by the analgesic meloxicam. This demonstrates the utility of this assay in detecting cold pain. Collectively, our study has identified a new and effective tool that uses cost-benefit valuations to study thermosensation and thermal pain.

Center Hemodialysis Versus Peritoneal Dialysis: A Cost-Utility Analysis.

Introduction Kidney replacement therapy (KRT) is needed for patients with end-stage kidney disease. While it is clear that kidney transplantation remains the gold standard in KRT, data comparing the cost-utility of peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) are scarce. No such analysis has been performed for German patients.  Methods We used aggregated data generated by the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) for quality of life and insurance claims to evaluate mortality and economic impact. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and cost-utility were calculated accordingly.  Results PD is superior to HD within all dimensions of the SF-36, both in terms of QALY and cost-utility. The difference in cost per QALY between the aggregated physical dimensions (€50,671.54 vs. €39,745.77) is greater than that of the aggregated mental dimensions (€31,638.75 vs. €25,287.63). However, there is considerable variability among patients.  Conclusion From a health-economic point of view, PD should be preferred over HD when deciding on the KRT modality for the patient. This is not reflected in current practice, though. However, interindividual differences and patient preferences should be considered in the decision.

Improving perioperative acetaminophen administration for safer and cost-effective multimodal analgesia in pediatric surgery: A QI initiative.

BACKGROUND: The use of acetaminophen in the perioperative period has emerged as an attractive option for providing safer and cost-effective analgesia in children. AIMS: The primary aim of our project was to increase the use of acetaminophen (both oral and intravenous) in the perioperative period from a baseline of 39.5% to 50% for all surgical patients within 24 months. The secondary aim was to increase the use of enteral acetaminophen from 10% to 52.5% during the same period. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team was formed, and model for improvement was chosen as the QI methodology. The primary measure was the total percentage of surgical patients receiving any form of perioperative acetaminophen, while our secondary measure was the percentage use of oral acetaminophen administration. We also tracked the average maximum PACU (Post Anesthesia Care Unit) pain scores and the percentage of patients receiving IV opioids. Multiple interventions were conducted, including education, increasing the availability of acetaminophen, and optimizing the electronic medical record (EMR). Monthly data was collected using an automated report in the EMR. RESULTS: We successfully achieved our goal, increasing the use of acetaminophen from 39.5% to 70% within four months. Despite some fluctuations, by the end of 24 months, we not only met but surpassed our goal, with 63% of patients receiving perioperative acetaminophen. Similarly, the usage of oral acetaminophen increased from a baseline of 10% to 78%. Our average maximum PACU pain scores improved from 5.4 to 5.2, and the percentage of patients receiving rescue opioids decreased from 15.4 to 13.1. CONCLUSION: We successfully achieved and sustained our goals of improving acetaminophen use for our surgical patients without worsening pain scores or worsening use of intravenous opioids. Future directions include further refining our strategies and exploring additional opportunities to optimize pain management in pediatric perioperative settings.

[Cost-effectiveness analysis of fracture liaison services in Catalonia]. / Análisis de coste-efectividad de las Unidades de Coordinación de Fracturas en Cataluña.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) compared to the standard of care for secondary prevention of fragility fractures form the perspective of the Catalan Health Service. METHODS: Cost-utility assessment through a Markov model that simulated disease progression of a patients' cohort candidates to initiate antiosteoporotic treatment after a fragility fracture. A time horizon of 10 years and a 6-month duration per cycle was established. Clinical, economics and quality of life parameters were obtained from the literature and derived from four Catalan FLS. The Catalan Health Service perspective was adopted, considering direct health costs expressed in 2022 euros. A 3% discount rate was applied on costs and outcomes. Uncertainty was assessed through multiple sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Compared to the standard of care, FLS would promote antiosteoporotic initiation and persistence, reducing the incidence and mortality associated with subsequent fragility fractures. This incremental clinical benefit was estimated at 0.055 years and 0.112 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient. A higher cost (€1,073.79 per patient) was estimated, resulting into an incremental cost-utility ratio of €9,602.72 per QALYs gained. The sensitivity analyses performed were consistent, corroborating the robustness and conservative approach of the base-case. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of FLS for the secondary prevention of FF would represent a cost-effective strategy from the Catalan Health Service perspective.

Electronic Decision-Making Tool for Smoking Cessation (Pare de Fumar Conosco) Versus Standard of Care: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Pare de Fumar Conosco software compared with the standard of care adopted in Brazil for the treatment of smoking cessation. METHODS: In the cohort of smokers with multiple chronic conditions, we developed an decision tree model for the benefit measures of smoking cessation. We adopted the perspectives of the Brazilian Unified Health System and the service provider. Resources and costs were measured by primary and secondary sources and effectiveness by a randomized clinical trial. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated, followed by deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses and deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. No willingness to pay threshold was adopted. RESULTS: The software had a lower cost and greater effectiveness than its comparator. The ICER was dominant in all of the benefits examined (-R$2 585 178.29 to -R$325 001.20). The cost of the standard of care followed by that of the electronic tool affected the ICER of the benefit measures. In all probabilistic analyses, the software was superior to the standard of care (53.6%-82.5%). CONCLUSION: The Pare de Fumar Conosco software is a technology that results in cost savings in treating smoking cessation.

Cost-Effectiveness of Technologies for the Treatment of Spinal Muscular Atrophy: A Systematic Review of Economic Studies.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to systematically collect data on cost-effectiveness analyses that assess technologies to treat type I and II spinal muscular atrophy and evaluate their recommendations. METHODS: A structured electronic search was conducted in 4 databases. Additionally, a complementary manual search was conducted. Complete economic studies that evaluated nusinersen, risdiplam, onasemnogene abeparvovec (OA), and the best support therapy (BST) from the health system's perspective were selected. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were compared with various thresholds for the analysis. The review was registered a priori in PROSPERO (CRD42022365391). RESULTS: Twenty studies were included in the analyses. They were all published between 2017 and 2022 and represent the recommendations in 8 countries. Most studies adopted 5, 6, or 10-state Markov models. Some authors took part in multiple studies. Four technologies were evaluated: BST (N = 14), nusinersen (N = 19), risdiplam (N = 5), and OA (N = 9). OA, risdiplam, and nusinersen were considered inefficient compared with the BST. Risdiplam and OA were generally regarded as cost-effective when compared with nusinersen. Because nusinersen is not a cost-effective drug, no recommendation can be derived from this result. Risdiplam and OA were compared in 2 studies that presented opposite results. CONCLUSIONS: Nusinersen, risdiplam, and OA are being adopted worldwide as a treatment for spinal muscular atrophy. Despite that, the pharmacoeconomic analyses show that the technologies are not cost-effective compared with the BST. The lack of controlled studies for risdiplam and OA hamper any conclusions about their face-to-face comparison.

A quality appraisal of economic evaluations of community water fluoridation: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To critically appraise the methodological conduct and reporting quality of economic evaluations (EE) of community water fluoridation (CWF). METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in general databases and specialist directories of the economic literature. The Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list (CHEC) appraised the methodological quality while the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) assessed the reporting quality of included studies. RESULTS: A total of 1,138 records were identified, of which 18 met the inclusion criteria. Cost analysis emerged as the most prevalent type of EE, though a growing trend towards conducting full EEs is observed. CHEC revealed the items most frequently unfulfilled were the study design, measurement and valuation of costs and outcomes, while CHEERS also identified reporting deficiencies in these aspects. Furthermore, the review highlights subtleties in methodological aspects that may not be discerned by CHEC, such as the estimation of the impact of fluoridation and the inclusion of treatment savings within cost estimates. CONCLUSIONS: While numerous studies were conducted before publication of these assessment instruments, this review reveals that a noteworthy subset of studies exhibited good methodological conduct and reporting quality. There has been a steady improvement in the methodological and reporting quality over time, with recently published EEs largely adhering to best practice guidelines. The evidence presented will assist policymakers in leveraging the available evidence effectively to inform resource allocation decisions. It may also serve as a resource for researchers to enhance the methodological and reporting standards of future EEs of CWF.

A life cycle cost analysis of different shore power incentive policies on both shore and ship sides based on system dynamics and a Chinese port case.

Shore power (SP) is widely recognized as an efficient strategy for reducing air pollution in port areas. Unfortunately, the adoption of SP has been relatively low, resulting in limited emission reductions and financial losses. To address these challenges, this paper focuses on enhancing the utilization rate of SP, which is meaningful for emission control and environmental protection. This paper combines system dynamics with a study of the benefits of SP, which bridges the research gap to some extent. We propose a system dynamics model that assesses the impact of various incentive policies on the economic and environmental benefits of SP. The model considers the life cycle cost and comprises four subsystems. By conducting a case study on Nansha Port, we find that price subsidies are more effective than construction subsidies in overcoming economic barriers. Furthermore, we observe that the overall economic benefits only increase when the electricity price decreases. This is because lowering the electricity price enhances the profitability of ships without negatively affecting port revenue. Additionally, it is the proportion of the electricity price and service price that determines the overall economic benefits, rather than the SP price itself. Hence, it is recommended to provide preferential subsidies for the electricity price.

Allopurinol and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart disease: the ALL-HEART RCT and economic evaluation.

Background: Allopurinol is a xanthine oxidase inhibitor that lowers serum uric acid and is used to prevent acute gout flares in patients with gout. Observational and small interventional studies have suggested beneficial cardiovascular effects of allopurinol. Objective: To determine whether allopurinol improves major cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart disease. Design: Prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint multicentre clinical trial. Setting: Four hundred and twenty-four UK primary care practices. Participants: Aged 60 years and over with ischaemic heart disease but no gout. Interventions: Participants were randomised (1 : 1) using a central web-based randomisation system to receive allopurinol up to 600 mg daily that was added to usual care or to continue usual care. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the composite of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or cardiovascular death. Secondary outcomes were non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, hospitalisation for heart failure, hospitalisation for acute coronary syndrome, coronary revascularisation, hospitalisation for acute coronary syndrome or coronary revascularisation, all cardiovascular hospitalisations, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. The hazard ratio (allopurinol vs. usual care) in a Cox proportional hazards model was assessed for superiority in a modified intention-to-treat analysis. Results: From 7 February 2014 to 2 October 2017, 5937 participants were enrolled and randomised to the allopurinol arm (n = 2979) or the usual care arm (n = 2958). A total of 5721 randomised participants (2853 allopurinol; 2868 usual care) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis population (mean age 72.0 years; 75.5% male). There was no difference between the allopurinol and usual care arms in the primary endpoint, 314 (11.0%) participants in the allopurinol arm (2.47 events per 100 patient-years) and 325 (11.3%) in the usual care arm (2.37 events per 100 patient-years), hazard ratio 1.04 (95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.21); p = 0.65. Two hundred and eighty-eight (10.1%) participants in the allopurinol arm and 303 (10.6%) participants in the usual care arm died, hazard ratio 1.02 (95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.20); p = 0.77. The pre-specified health economic analysis plan was to perform a 'within trial' cost-utility analysis if there was no statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint, so NHS costs and quality-adjusted life-years were estimated over a 5-year period. The difference in costs between treatment arms was +£115 higher for allopurinol (95% confidence interval £17 to £210) with no difference in quality-adjusted life-years (95% confidence interval -0.061 to +0.060). We conclude that there is no evidence that allopurinol used in line with the study protocol is cost-effective. Limitations: The results may not be generalisable to younger populations, other ethnic groups or patients with more acute ischaemic heart disease. One thousand six hundred and thirty-seven participants (57.4%) in the allopurinol arm withdrew from randomised treatment, but an on-treatment analysis gave similar results to the main analysis. Conclusions: The ALL-HEART study showed that treatment with allopurinol 600 mg daily did not improve cardiovascular outcomes compared to usual care in patients with ischaemic heart disease. We conclude that allopurinol should not be recommended for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with ischaemic heart disease but no gout. Future work: The effects of allopurinol on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart disease and co-existing hyperuricaemia or clinical gout could be explored in future studies. Trial registration: This trial is registered as EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2013-003559-39) and ISRCTN (ISRCTN 32017426). Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 11/36/41) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 18. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

The purpose of the ALL-HEART study was to determine whether giving allopurinol to people with ischaemic heart disease (also commonly known as coronary heart disease) would reduce their risk of having a heart attack, stroke or of dying from cardiovascular disease. Allopurinol is a medication usually given to patients with gout to prevent acute gout flares. It is not currently used to treat ischaemic heart disease. We randomly allocated people aged over 60 years with ischaemic heart disease to take up to 600 mg of allopurinol daily (in addition to their usual care) or to continue with their usual care. We then monitored participants for several years and recorded any major health events such as heart attacks, strokes and deaths. We obtained most of the follow-up data from centrally held electronic hospital admissions and death records, making the study easier for participants and more cost-efficient. We asked participants in both groups to complete questionnaires to assess their quality of life during the study. We also collected data to determine whether there was any economic benefit to the NHS of using allopurinol in patients with ischaemic heart disease. There was no difference in the risk of heart attacks, strokes or death from cardiovascular disease between the participants given allopurinol and those in the group continuing their usual care. We also found no difference in the risks of other cardiovascular events, deaths from any cause or quality-of-life measurements between the allopurinol and usual care groups. The results of the ALL-HEART study suggest that we should not recommend that allopurinol be given to people with ischaemic heart disease to prevent further cardiovascular events or deaths.

Patient-reported outcome measures for monitoring primary care patients with depression: the PROMDEP cluster RCT and economic evaluation.

Background: Guidelines on the management of depression recommend that practitioners use patient-reported outcome measures for the follow-up monitoring of symptoms, but there is a lack of evidence of benefit in terms of patient outcomes. Objective: To test using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 questionnaire as a patient-reported outcome measure for monitoring depression, training practitioners in interpreting scores and giving patients feedback. Design: Parallel-group, cluster-randomised superiority trial; 1 : 1 allocation to intervention and control. Setting: UK primary care (141 group general practices in England and Wales). Inclusion criteria: Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a new episode of depressive disorder or symptoms, recruited mainly through medical record searches, plus opportunistically in consultations. Exclusions: Current depression treatment, dementia, psychosis, substance misuse and risk of suicide. Intervention: Administration of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 questionnaire with patient feedback soon after diagnosis, and at follow-up 10-35 days later, compared with usual care. Primary outcome: Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, symptom scores at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes: Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, scores at 26 weeks; antidepressant drug treatment and mental health service contacts; social functioning (Work and Social Adjustment Scale) and quality of life (EuroQol 5-Dimension, five-level) at 12 and 26 weeks; service use over 26 weeks to calculate NHS costs; patient satisfaction at 26 weeks (Medical Informant Satisfaction Scale); and adverse events. Sample size: The original target sample of 676 patients recruited was reduced to 554 due to finding a significant correlation between baseline and follow-up values for the primary outcome measure. Randomisation: Remote computerised randomisation with minimisation by recruiting university, small/large practice and urban/rural location. Blinding: Blinding of participants was impossible given the open cluster design, but self-report outcome measures prevented observer bias. Analysis was blind to allocation. Analysis: Linear mixed models were used, adjusted for baseline depression, baseline anxiety, sociodemographic factors, and clustering including practice as random effect. Quality of life and costs were analysed over 26 weeks. Qualitative interviews: Practitioner and patient interviews were conducted to reflect on trial processes and use of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 using the Normalization Process Theory framework. Results: Three hundred and two patients were recruited in intervention arm practices and 227 patients were recruited in control practices. Primary outcome data were collected for 252 (83.4%) and 195 (85.9%), respectively. No significant difference in Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, score was found at 12 weeks (adjusted mean difference -0.46, 95% confidence interval -2.16 to 1.26). Nor were significant differences found in Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd Edition, score at 26 weeks, social functioning, patient satisfaction or adverse events. EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version, quality-of-life scores favoured the intervention arm at 26 weeks (adjusted mean difference 0.053, 95% confidence interval 0.013 to 0.093). However, quality-adjusted life-years over 26 weeks were not significantly greater (difference 0.0013, 95% confidence interval -0.0157 to 0.0182). Costs were lower in the intervention arm but, again, not significantly (-£163, 95% confidence interval -£349 to £28). Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses, therefore, suggested that the intervention was dominant over usual care, but with considerable uncertainty around the point estimates. Patients valued using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 to compare scores at baseline and follow-up, whereas practitioner views were more mixed, with some considering it too time-consuming. Conclusions: We found no evidence of improved depression management or outcome at 12 weeks from using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, but patients' quality of life was better at 26 weeks, perhaps because feedback of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores increased their awareness of improvement in their depression and reduced their anxiety. Further research in primary care should evaluate patient-reported outcome measures including anxiety symptoms, administered remotely, with algorithms delivering clear recommendations for changes in treatment. Study registration: This study is registered as IRAS250225 and ISRCTN17299295. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/42/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 17. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Depression is common, can be disabling and costs the nation billions. The National Health Service recommends general practitioners who treat people with depression use symptom questionnaires to help assess whether those people are getting better over time. A symptom questionnaire is one type of patient-reported outcome measure. Patient-reported outcome measures appear to benefit people having therapy and mental health care, but this approach has not been tested thoroughly in general practice. Most people with depression are treated in general practice, so it is important to test patient-reported outcome measures there, too. In this study, we tested whether using a patient-reported outcome measure helps people with depression get better more quickly. The study was a 'randomised controlled trial' in general practices, split into two groups. In one group, people with depression completed the Patient Health Questionnaire, or 'PHQ-9', patient-reported outcome measure, which measures nine symptoms of depression. In the other group, people with depression were treated as usual without the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. We fed the results of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 back to the people with depression themselves to show them how severe their depression was and asked them to discuss the results with the practitioners looking after them. We found no differences between the patient-reported outcome measure group and the control group in their level of depression; their work or social life; their satisfaction with care from their practice; or their use of medicines, therapy or specialist care for depression. However, we did find that their quality of life was improved at 6 months, and the costs of the National Health Service services they used were lower. Using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 can improve patients' quality of life, perhaps by making them more aware of improvement in their depression symptoms, and less anxious as a result. Future research should test using a patient-reported outcome measure that includes anxiety and processing the answers through a computer to give practitioners clearer advice on possible changes to treatment for depression.

A cost-benefit analysis of genetic screening test for breast cancer in Iran.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of the population- and family history (FH) -based screening for BReast CAncer (BRCA) in Iran, a country where less than 10% of breast cancer cases are attributable to a gene mutation. METHODS: This was an economic evaluation study. The Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) for genetic screening test strategies in Iranian women older than 30 was calculated. To this end, the monetary value of the test was estimated using the willingness-to-pay (WTP) approach using the contingent valuation method (CVM) by payment card. From a healthcare perspective, direct medical and non-medical costs were considered and a decision model for the strategies was developed to simulate the costs. A one-way sensitivity analysis assessed the robustness of the analysis. The data were analyzed using Excel 2010. RESULTS: 660 women were included for estimating WTP and 2,176,919 women were considered in the costing model. The cost per genetic screening test for population- and FH-based strategies was $167 and $8, respectively. The monetary value of a genetic screening test was $20 and it was $27 for women with a family history or gene mutation in breast cancer. The BCR for population-based and FH-based screening strategies was 0.12 and 3.37, respectively. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. CONCLUSIONS: This study recommends the implementation of a FH-based strategy instead of a population-based genetic screening strategy in Iran, although a cascade genetic screening test strategy should be evaluated in future studies.