Prospective evaluation of the cost of diagnosis and treatment of invasive fungal disease in a cohort of adult haematology patients in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: The direct cost of invasive fungal disease (IFD) includes antifungal drugs as well as diagnostic tests. The aim of this study was to determine these costs. METHODS: A total of 203 haematology patients were enrolled into the study and followed for a median of 556 days. Data were prospectively collected on antifungal drugs, diagnostic tests, length of stay and antibiotic usage. RESULTS: The overall mean (IQR) cost of care per patient (using UK-based reference costs) was £88 911 (45 339-121 594), £61 509 (39 748-78 383), £50 332 (23 037-72 057) and £34 075 (19 928-43 900) for proven/probable IFD, possible IFD, not classified and no evidence of IFD, respectively (P<0.001). The attributable cost of IFD was £54 836. Inpatient hospital stay accounted for nearly 74% of costs. In proven/probable IFD inpatient care, antifungals, antibiotics and IFD status accounted for 68%, 25%, 5% and 2%, respectively, compared with 85%, 11%, 2% and 2%, respectively, for no IFD (P<0.001). Among the allogeneic transplant patients, £36 914 (60%) of the total cost (£60 917) was used during the first 100 days. CONCLUSIONS: IFD was associated with longer length of stay and higher total overall cost of care, with attributable costs greater than £50 000 per case of IFD. Costs for inpatient stay far outstrip the cost of antifungal agents.

Treatment for stable HIV patients in England: can we increase efficiency and improve patient care?

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the costs and potential efficiency gains of changing the frequency of clinic appointments and drug dispensing arrangements for stable HIV patients compared to the costs of hospital pharmacy dispensing and home delivery. METHODS: We estimated the annual costs per patient (HIV clinic visits and either first-line treatment or a common second-line regimen, with some patients switching to a second-line regimen during the year). The cost of three-, four- and six-monthly clinic appointments and drug supply was estimated assuming hospital dispensing (incurring value-added tax) and home delivery. Three-monthly appointments and hospital drug dispensing (baseline) were compared to other strategies. RESULTS: The baseline was the most costly option (£10,587 if first-line treatment and no switch to second-line regimen). Moving to six-monthly appointments and home delivery yielded savings of £1883 per patient annually. Assuming patients start on different regimens and may switch to second-line therapies, six-monthly appointments and three-monthly home delivery of drugs is the least expensive option and could result in nearly £2000 savings per patient. This translates to annual cost reduction of about £8 million for the estimated 4000 eligible patients not currently on home delivery in London, England. CONCLUSIONS: Different appointment schedules and drug supply options should be considered for stable HIV patients based on efficiency gains. However, this should be assessed for individual patients to meet their needs, especially around adherence and patient support.

Mapping patient pathways and estimating resource use for point of care versus standard testing and treatment of chlamydia and gonorrhoea in genitourinary medicine clinics in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to explore patient pathways using a chlamydia/gonorrhoea point-of-care (POC) nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT), and estimate and compare the costs of the proposed POC pathways with the current pathways using standard laboratory-based NAAT testing. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS: Workshops were conducted with healthcare professionals at four sexual health clinics representing diverse models of care in the UK. They mapped out current pathways that used chlamydia/gonorrhoea tests, and constructed new pathways using a POC NAAT. Healthcare professionals' time was assessed in each pathway. OUTCOME MEASURE: The proposed POC pathways were then priced using a model built in Microsoft Excel, and compared to previously published costs for pathways using standard NAAT-based testing in an off-site laboratory. RESULTS: Pathways using a POC NAAT for asymptomatic and symptomatic patients and chlamydia/gonorrhoea-only tests were shorter and less expensive than most of the current pathways. Notably, we estimate that POC testing as part of a sexual health screen for symptomatic patients, or as stand-alone chlamydia/gonorrhoea testing, could reduce costs per patient by as much as £16 or £6, respectively. In both cases, healthcare professionals' time would be reduced by approximately 10 min per patient. CONCLUSIONS: POC testing for chlamydia/gonorrhoea in a clinical setting may reduce costs and clinician time, and may lead to more appropriate and quicker care for patients. Further study is warranted on how to best implement POC testing in clinics, and on the broader clinical and cost implications of this technology.