Cost-Effectiveness of Test-and-Treat Strategies to Reduce the Antibiotic Prescription Rate for Acute Febrile Illness in Primary Healthcare Clinics in Africa.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate antibiotic use increases selective pressure, contributing to antimicrobial resistance. Point-of-care rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) would be instrumental to better target antibiotic prescriptions, but widespread implementation of diagnostics for improved management of febrile illnesses is limited. OBJECTIVE: Our study aims to contribute to evidence-based guidance to inform policymakers on investment decisions regarding interventions that foster more appropriate antibiotic prescriptions, as well as to address the evidence gap on the potential clinical and economic impact of RDTs on antibiotic prescription. METHODS: A country-based cost-effectiveness model was developed for Burkina Faso, Ghana and Uganda. The decision tree model simulated seven test strategies for patients with febrile illness to assess the effect of different RDT combinations on antibiotic prescription rate (APR), costs and clinical outcomes. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was expressed as the incremental cost per percentage point (ppt) reduction in APR. RESULTS: For Burkina Faso and Uganda, testing all patients with a malaria RDT was dominant compared to standard-of-care (SoC) (which included malaria testing). Expanding the test panel with a C-reactive protein (CRP) test resulted in an ICER of $ 0.03 and $ 0.08 per ppt reduction in APR for Burkina Faso and Uganda, respectively. For Ghana, the pairwise comparison with SoC-including malaria and complete blood count testing-indicates that both testing with malaria RDT only and malaria RDT + CRP are dominant. CONCLUSION: The use of RDTs for patients with febrile illness could effectively reduce APR at minimal additional costs, provided diagnostic algorithms are adhered to. Complementing SoC with CRP testing may increase clinicians' confidence in prescribing decisions and is a favourable strategy.

Economic Evaluations of Screening Programs for Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review is to appraise and assimilate evidence from studies that have reported on the cost-effectiveness of screening programs for chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: The study protocol was registered on International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The final search was conducted on 18 January 2023 using 7 databases. Screening of articles, data extraction, and quality assessment was performed by 2 independent reviewers. The ISPOR-AMCP-NPC checklist was used to assess the credibility of the included studies. RESULTS: From 4948 retrieved studies, a final total of 20 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Studies found that screening in diabetic populations was cost-effective (n = 8, 57%) or even cost-saving (n = 6, 43%). Four studies (67%) found that screening in hypertensive populations was also cost-effective. For the general population, findings were inconsistent across studies in which many found screening to be cost-effective (n = 11, 69%), some cost-saving (n = 2, 12%), and others not cost-effective (n = 3, 19%). The most influential parameters identified were prevalence of CKD and cost of screening. CONCLUSIONS: Screening for CKD in patients with diabetes or hypertension is recommended from a cost-effectiveness point of view. For the general population, despite some inconsistent findings, the majority of studies demonstrated that screening in this population is cost-effective, depending mainly on the prevalence and the costs of screening. Healthcare decision makers need to consider the prevalence, stratification strategies, and advocate for lower screening costs to reduce the burden on healthcare budgets and to make screening even more favorable from the health-economic perspective.

Cost Effectiveness of a CYP2C19 Genotype-Guided Strategy in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: Results from the POPular Genetics Trial.

INTRODUCTION: The POPular Genetics trial demonstrated that a CYP2C19 genotype-guided P2Y12 inhibitor strategy reduced bleeding rates compared with standard treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel without increasing thrombotic event rates after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). OBJECTIVE: In this analysis, we aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of a genotype-guided strategy compared with standard treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel. METHODS: A 1-year decision tree based on the POPular Genetics trial in combination with a lifelong Markov model was developed to compare costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) between a genotype-guided and a standard P2Y12 inhibitor strategy in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing primary PCI. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from a Dutch healthcare system perspective. Within-trial survival and utility data were combined with lifetime projections to evaluate lifetime cost effectiveness for a cohort of 1000 patients. Costs and utilities were discounted at 4 and 1.5%, respectively, according to Dutch guidelines for health economic studies. Besides deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, several scenario analyses were also conducted (different time horizons, different discount rates, equal prices for P2Y12 inhibitors, and equal distribution of thrombotic events between the two strategies). RESULTS: Base-case analysis with a hypothetical cohort of 1000 subjects demonstrated 8.98 QALYs gained and €725,550.69 in cost savings for the genotype-guided strategy (dominant). The deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the model and the cost-effectiveness results. In scenario analyses, the genotype-guided strategy remained dominant. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing primary PCI, a CYP2C19 genotype-guided strategy compared with standard treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel resulted in QALYs gained and cost savings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT01761786, Netherlands trial register number: NL2872.