Economic burden of depression in Brazil: a cost-of-illness study based on productivity losses and healthcare costs between 2010 to 2018.

BACKGROUND: Depression is disabling disorder and cause functional impairments, and high costs for the health and social security system. OBJECTIVE: The direct and indirect costs of depression from the societal perspective were estimated for the period 2010 to 2018. METHODS: This cost-of-illness study in adults is based on prevalence, with a top-down approach, from the societal perspective. Direct (hospital and outpatient) and indirect (absenteeism) costs were included. Data were extracted from the Hospital and Outpatient Information Systems and the National Social Security Institute. RESULTS: The cost of depression was Int$ 2,288,511,607.39 in the analyzed period, with an average annual cost of Int$ 254,279,067.49. From 2014 to 2018, had a sharp and persistent decrease in the cost of depression (-44.24%), mainly in indirect costs (-55.83%). In the period investigated, indirect costs represented 74.85% of the total cost. Over time, outpatient surpassed hospital cost. In 2017 and 2018, outpatient costs represented 43.22% and 39.57% of total costs. In all the years and cost components analyzed, women predominated. CONCLUSIONS: Depression is a disease with a high economic burden for the healthcare system. Investments are still needed, such as higher coverage of services, multidisciplinary teams, and training of health professionals for psychosocial care.

How long does it take to translate research findings into routine healthcare practice?-the case of biological drugs for rheumatoid arthritis in Brazil.

Background: The literature reports long time lags between the several processes involved in the translation of drug research and development into clinical application. To expedite these processes, translational research has emerged as a process that can be applied to reduce the lag between scientific discoveries and their practical application. Thus, the objective of this study was to estimate the time lag in translational research of biological drugs for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis included in the Brazilian Unified Health System [Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS)]. Methods: A descriptive retrospective study was conducted based on secondary data loaded by SUS users in public sources and systems to estimate the time lag between the publication of phase I clinical trial results to drug use in clinical settings. The dates of translational research activities were identified from markers and steps. Structured searches were conducted in the literature and reports from the National Commission for the Incorporation of Technologies in the SUS (Conitec) as well as from health authorities, and analyzed. Results: Between 2012 and 2019, SUS included five biological agents for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. The mean time lag from clinical development to use of these agents was 11.13 years (range, 8.57 to 12.90 years). The mean time lag for the stages of translational research were 5.30 (T1-basic research to clinical research), 5.08 (T2-clinical research to research synthesis), and 0.75 (T3-research synthesis to evidence-based practice) years. A shorter time lag was observed in the Brazilian case when it was possible to compare with other studies. Conclusions: The estimated time lag of biological drugs used in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis was determined based on the translational research steps model adapted to the Brazilian context. Brazil has instituted legal frameworks that set deadlines for sanitary registration, health technology assessment (HTA), and the availability of drugs in the SUS, thus, allowing for a reduced stage T2 time lag. Nevertheless, improvements are still required in stages T1 and T2, especially in publishing the results of clinical trials.

Performance bonuses and the quality of primary health care delivered by family health teams in Brazil: A difference-in-differences analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pay-for-performance (P4P) programmes to incentivise health providers to improve quality of care have been widely implemented globally. Despite intuitive appeal, evidence on the effectiveness of P4P is mixed, potentially due to differences in how schemes are designed. We exploited municipality variation in the design features of Brazil's National Programme for Improving Primary Care Access and Quality (PMAQ) to examine whether performance bonuses given to family health team workers were associated with changes in the quality of care and whether the size of bonus mattered. METHODS AND FINDINGS: For this quasi-experimental study, we used a difference-in-differences approach combined with matching. We compared changes over time in the quality of care delivered by family health teams between (bonus) municipalities that chose to use some or all of the PMAQ money to provide performance-related bonuses to team workers with (nonbonus) municipalities that invested the funds using traditional input-based budgets. The primary outcome was the PMAQ score, a quality of care index on a scale of 0 to 100, based on several hundred indicators (ranging from 598 to 660) of health care delivery. We did one-to-one matching of bonus municipalities to nonbonus municipalities based on baseline demographic and economic characteristics. On the matched sample, we used ordinary least squares regression to estimate the association of any bonus and size of bonus with the prepost change over time (between November 2011 and October 2015) in the PMAQ score. We performed subgroup analyses with respect to the local area income of the family health team. The matched analytical sample comprised 2,346 municipalities (1,173 nonbonus municipalities; 1,173 bonus municipalities), containing 10,275 family health teams that participated in PMAQ from the outset. Bonus municipalities were associated with a 4.6 (95% CI: 2.7 to 6.4; p < 0.001) percentage point increase in the PMAQ score compared with nonbonus municipalities. The association with quality of care increased with the size of bonus: the largest bonus group saw an improvement of 8.2 percentage points (95% CI: 6.2 to 10.2; p < 0.001) compared with the control. The subgroup analysis showed that the observed improvement in performance was most pronounced in the poorest two-fifths of localities. The limitations of the study include the potential for bias from unmeasured time-varying confounding and the fact that the PMAQ score has not been validated as a measure of quality of care. CONCLUSIONS: Performance bonuses to family health team workers compared with traditional input-based budgets were associated with an improvement in the quality of care.

Adoption of new therapies in the treatment of Hepatitis: a verification of the accuracy of budget impact analysis to guide investment decisions.

OBJECTIVES: While there are good Budget Impact Analysis (BIA) guidelines, studies still register potential bias. To do this, we compared the results between theoretical and real-world evidence (RWE) expenditures for medicines for Hepatitis C: boceprevir (BOC) and telaprevir (TVR). While both are not currently recommended in treatment guidelines following recent developments, this is an emblematic case because for 4 years these medicines consumed considerable resources. METHODS: Theoretical results and RWE expenditures were compared regarding the incorporation of BOC and TVR in 2013-2014 into the Brazilian Public Health System. Theoretical values were extracted from Commission for Technology Incorporation Report and RWE expenditures were extracted from the administrative data records using deterministic-probabilistic linkage. RESULTS: The estimated number of patients treated (BOC+TVR) was 13,012 versus 7,641 (real). The estimated purchase price for BOC was US$6.20 versus US$11.07 (real) and for TVR was US$42.21 versus US$84.09 (average/real). The estimated budget impact was US$285.16 million versus US$128.58 million (real). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates appreciable divergence (US$156.58 million) between the theoretical budget impact and RWE expenditures due to underestimated purchase prices and overestimated populations. The greater the degree of accuracy the more reliable and usable BIAs become for decision-making.

Budget impact analysis of medicines: estimated values versus real-world evidence and the implications.

OBJECTIVES: Budget Impact Analyses (BIA) of medicines helps managers in promoting health systems' sustainability when assessing the role and value of new medicines. However, it is not clear whether BIAs typically underestimate or overestimate the impact on real-world budgets. This retroactive analysis seeks to compare estimated values obtained by a BIA and Real-World Evidence (RWE) to guide discussions. METHODS: The estimated values were obtained through a BIA concerning the incorporation of adalimumab for the treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis into the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS) carried out retroactively and per international guidelines. RWE data was extracted from SUS computerized systems. We subsequently compared the number of treatments, costs, and Incremental Budget Impact (IBI). RESULTS: - The total number of treatments was underestimated by 10% (6,243) and the total expenditure was overestimated by 463% (US$ 4.7 billion). In five years, the total difference between the estimated values and real IBI reached US$ 1.1 billion. A current expenditure of US$ 1.0 was observed for every US$ 5.60 of estimated expenditure. CONCLUSION: - The higher estimates from the BIA might cause decision makers to be more cautious with the introduction of a new medicine to reduce the opportunity costs for other interventions.