Adopting electric school buses in the United States: Health and climate benefits.

Electric school buses have been proposed as an alternative to reduce the health and climate impacts of the current U.S. school bus fleet, of which a substantial share are highly polluting old diesel vehicles. However, the climate and health benefits of electric school buses are not well known. As they are substantially more costly than diesel buses, assessing their benefits is needed to inform policy decisions. We assess the health benefits of electric school buses in the United States from reduced adult mortality and childhood asthma onset risks due to exposure to ambient fine particulate matter (PM2.5). We also evaluate climate benefits from reduced greenhouse-gas emissions. We find that replacing the average diesel bus in the U.S. fleet in 2017 with an electric bus yields $84,200 in total benefits. Climate benefits amount to $40,400/bus, whereas health benefits amount to $43,800/bus due to 4.42*10-3 fewer PM2.5-attributable deaths ($40,000 of total) and 7.42*10-3 fewer PM2.5-attributable new childhood asthma cases ($3,700 of total). However, health benefits of electric buses vary substantially by driving location and model year (MY) of the diesel buses they replace. Replacing old, MY 2005 diesel buses in large cities yields $207,200/bus in health benefits and is likely cost-beneficial, although other policies that accelerate fleet turnover in these areas deserve consideration. Electric school buses driven in rural areas achieve small health benefits from reduced exposure to ambient PM2.5. Further research assessing benefits of reduced exposure to in-cabin air pollution among children riding buses would be valuable to inform policy decisions.

Forecasting the Economic Burden of Cardiovascular Disease and Stroke in the United States Through 2050: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association.

BACKGROUND: Quantifying the economic burden of cardiovascular disease and stroke over the coming decades may inform policy, health system, and community-level interventions for prevention and treatment. METHODS: We used nationally representative health, economic, and demographic data to project health care costs attributable to key cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia) and conditions (coronary heart disease, stroke, heart failure, atrial fibrillation) through 2050. The human capital approach was used to estimate productivity losses from morbidity and premature mortality due to cardiovascular conditions. RESULTS: One in 3 US adults received care for a cardiovascular risk factor or condition in 2020. Annual inflation-adjusted (2022 US dollars) health care costs of cardiovascular risk factors are projected to triple between 2020 and 2050, from $400 billion to $1344 billion. For cardiovascular conditions, annual health care costs are projected to almost quadruple, from $393 billion to $1490 billion, and productivity losses are projected to increase by 54%, from $234 billion to $361 billion. Stroke is projected to account for the largest absolute increase in costs. Large relative increases among the Asian American population (497%) and Hispanic American population (489%) reflect the projected increases in the size of these populations. CONCLUSIONS: The economic burden of cardiovascular risk factors and overt cardiovascular disease in the United States is projected to increase substantially in the coming decades. Development and deployment of cost-effective programs and policies to promote cardiovascular health are urgently needed to rein in costs and to equitably enhance population health.

The financial burden and distress of patients with cancer: Understanding and stepping-up action on the financial toxicity of cancer treatment.

"Financial toxicity" has now become a familiar term used in the discussion of cancer drugs, and it is gaining traction in the literature given the high price of newer classes of therapies. However, as a phenomenon in the contemporary treatment and care of people with cancer, financial toxicity is not fully understood, with the discussion on mitigation mainly geared toward interventions at the health system level. Although important, health policy prescriptions take time before their intended results manifest, if they are implemented at all. They require corresponding strategies at the individual patient level. In this review, the authors discuss the nature of financial toxicity, defined as the objective financial burden and subjective financial distress of patients with cancer, as a result of treatments using innovative drugs and concomitant health services. They discuss coping with financial toxicity by patients and how maladaptive coping leads to poor health and nonhealth outcomes. They cover management strategies for oncologists, including having the difficult and urgent conversation about the cost and value of cancer treatment, availability of and access to resources, and assessment of financial toxicity as part of supportive care in the provision of comprehensive cancer care. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:153-165. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Cost containment analysis of superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) injection in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ.

PURPOSE: Recent studies have established the safety and efficacy of Superparamagnetic Iron Oxide (SPIO, Magtrace®) for delayed sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) who are undergoing mastectomy. The aim of our study was to measure cost containment with use of Magtrace® in comparison to upfront SLNB with traditional technetium-99 lymphatic tracer. METHODS: A total of 41 patients at our institution underwent mastectomy with Magtrace® injection for DCIS and were included in our single-institution, retrospective analysis. For comparison, total charges data were obtained for an upfront SLNB at the time of mastectomy. Cost comparison analysis was then performed against charges for intraoperative Magtrace® injection with additional charges incorporated for those patients who required return to the operating room for delayed SLNB. Total cost containment for the cohort with use of Magtrace® was then measured. RESULTS: Of the 41 patients who underwent Magtrace® injection, two patients required return to the operating room for a delayed SLNB for invasive disease. Including these charges for a second encounter into our cost analysis, the use of Magtrace® still yielded an overall cost containment of $205,793.55 in our cohort when comparing to patients who underwent upfront SLNB. For patients who underwent Magtrace® injection and did not require return to the operating room, charges were reduced by $6,768.52 per patient. CONCLUSION: The use of Magtrace® for delayed SLNB in patients with DCIS undergoing mastectomy yielded a significant overall cost containment, further supporting its use in this patient population.

Physician services and costs after disclosure of diagnostic sequencing results in the NYCKidSeq program.

PURPOSE: To better understand the effects of returning diagnostic sequencing results on clinical actions and economic outcomes for pediatric patients with suspected genetic disorders. METHODS: Longitudinal physician claims data after diagnostic sequencing were obtained for patients aged 0 to 21 years with neurologic, cardiac, and immunologic disorders with suspected genetic etiology. We assessed specialist consultation rates prompted by primary diagnostic results, as well as marginal effects on overall 18-month physician services and costs. RESULTS: We included data on 857 patients (median age: 9.6 years) with a median follow-up of 17.3 months after disclosure of diagnostic sequencing results. The likelihood of having ≥1 recommendation for specialist consultation in 155 patients with positive findings was high (72%) vs 23% in 443 patients with uncertain findings and 21% in 259 patients with negative findings (P < .001). Follow-through consultation occurred in 30%. Increases in 18-month physician services and costs following a positive finding diminished after multivariable adjustment. Also, no significant differences between those with uncertain and negative findings were demonstrated. CONCLUSION: Our study did not provide evidence for significant increases in downstream physician services and costs after returning positive or uncertain diagnostic sequencing findings. More large-scale longitudinal studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Longer-term quality of care, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of implementing a model of care for osteoarthritis: A cluster-randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of care, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness over 12 months after implementing a structured model of care for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) in primary healthcare as compared to usual care. DESIGN: In this pragmatic cluster-randomized, controlled trial with a stepped-wedge cohort design, we recruited 40 general practitioners (GPs), 37 physiotherapists (PTs), and 393 patients with symptomatic hip or knee OA from six municipalities (clusters) in Norway. The model included the delivery of a 3-hour patient education and 8-12 weeks individually tailored exercise programs, and interactive workshops for GPs and PTs. At 12 months, the patient-reported quality of care was assessed by the OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator questionnaire (16 items, pass rate 0-100%, 100%=best). Costs were obtained from patient-reported and national register data. Cost-effectiveness at the healthcare perspective was evaluated using incremental net monetary benefit (INMB). RESULTS: Of 393 patients, 109 were recruited during the control periods (control group) and 284 were recruited during interventions periods (intervention group). At 12 months the intervention group reported statistically significant higher quality of care compared to the control group (59% vs. 40%; mean difference: 17.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.1, 24.0)). Cost-effectiveness analyses showed that the model of care resulted in quality-adjusted life-years gained and cost-savings compared to usual care with mean INMB €2020 (95% CI 611, 3492) over 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that implementing the model of care for OA in primary healthcare, improved quality of care and showed cost-effectiveness over 12 months compared to usual care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02333656.

Cost-Effectiveness of Radar Localisation Versus Wire Localisation for Wide Local Excision of Non-palpable Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Wire localisation (WL) is the "gold standard" localisation technique for wide local excision (WLE) of non-palpable breast lesions but has disadvantages that have led to the development of wireless techniques. This study compared the cost-effectiveness of radar localisation (RL) to WL. METHODS: This was a single-institution study of 110 prospective patients with early-stage breast cancer undergoing WLE using RL with the SCOUT® Surgical Guidance System (2021-2023) compared with a cohort of 110 patients using WL. Margin status, re-excision rates, and surgery delays associated with preoperative localisation were compared. Costs from a third-party payer perspective in Australian dollars (AUD$) calculated by using microcosting, break-even point, and cost-utility analyses. RESULTS: A total of 110 WLEs using RL cost a total of AUD$402,281, in addition to the device cost of AUD$77,150. The average additional cost of a surgery delay was AUD$2318. Use of RL reduced the surgery delay rate by 10% (p = 0.029), preventing 11 delays with cost savings of AUD$25,496. No differences were identified in positive margin rates (RL: 11.8% vs. WL: 17.3%, p = 0.25) or re-excision rates (RL: 14.5% vs. WL: 21.8%, p = 0.221). In total, 290 RL cases are needed to break even. The cost of WLE using RL was greater than WL by AUD$567. There was a greater clinical benefit of 1.15 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and an incremental cost-utility ratio of AUD$493 per QALY favouring RL. CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of RL was a more cost-effective intervention than WL. Close to 300 RL cases are likely needed to be performed to recover costs of the medical device. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12624000068561.

Current Medicare reimbursement for complex endovascular aortic repair is inadequate based on results from a multi-institutional cost analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Complex endovascular juxta-, para- and suprarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (comEVAR) is frequently accomplished with commercially available fenestrated (FEVAR) devices or off-label use of aortoiliac devices with parallel branch stents (chEVAR). We sought to evaluate the implantable vascular device costs incurred with these procedures as compared with standard Medicare reimbursement to determine the financial viability of comEVAR in the modern era. METHODS: Five geographically distinct institutions with high-volume, complex aortic centers were included. Implantable aortoiliac and branch stent device cost data from 25 consecutive, recent, comEVAR in the treatment of juxta-, para-, and suprarenal aortic aneurysms at each center were analyzed. Cases of rupture, thoracic aneurysms, reinterventions, and physician-modified EVAR were excluded, as were ancillary costs from nonimplantable equipment. Data from all institutions were combined and stratified into an overall cost group and two, individual cost groups: FEVAR or chEVAR. These groups were compared, and each respective group was then compared with weighted Medicare reimbursement for Diagnosis-Related Group codes 268/269. Median device costs were obtained from an independent purchasing consortium of >3000 medical centers, yielding true median cost-to-institution data rather than speculative, administrative projections or estimates. RESULTS: A total of 125 cases were analyzed: 70 FEVAR and 53 chEVAR. Two cases of combined FEVAR/chEVAR were included in total cost analysis, but excluded from direct FEVAR vs chEVAR comparison. Median Medicare reimbursement was calculated as $35,755 per case. Combined average implantable device cost for all analyzed cases was $28,470 per case, or 80% of the median reimbursement ($28,470/$35,755). Average FEVAR device cost per case ($26,499) was significantly lower than average chEVAR cost per case ($32,122; P < .002). Device cost was 74% ($26,499/$35,755) of total reimbursement for FEVAR and 90% ($32,122/$35,755) for chEVAR. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this multi-institutional analysis show that implantable device cost alone represents the vast majority of weighted total Medicare reimbursement per case with comEVAR, and that chEVAR is significantly more costly than FEVAR. Inadequate Medicare reimbursement for these cases puts high-volume, high-complexity aortic centers at a distinct financial disadvantage. In the interest of optimizing patient care, these data suggest a reconsideration of previously established, outdated, Diagnosis-Related Group coding and Medicare reimbursement for comEVAR.

Cumulative pregnancy rates of two strategies: Day 3 fresh embryo transfer followed by Day 3 or Day 5/6 vitrification and embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Are cumulative pregnancy rates better if supernumerary embryos are vitrified on Day 5/6 instead of Day 3? SUMMARY ANSWER: The results do not show a significant difference in cumulative pregnancy rates between the Day 3 and Day 5/6 vitrification groups. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Pregnancy and live birth rates following IVF or ICSI treatment are higher after extended embryo culture and blastocyst transfer (Day 5/6) compared to cleavage-stage (Day 3) transfer. Cumulative pregnancy rates from one oocyte retrieval (OR) cycle show no significant difference after fresh and frozen embryo transfers, but only one study has used vitrification for the cryopreservation of supernumerary embryos while four studies have used a slow freezing protocol. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Our prospective randomized controlled trial was performed in an academic centre between January 2018 and August 2020. Patients were randomized into vitrification Day 3 (n = 80) or Day 5/6 (n = 81) groups. The primary outcome was the cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate (cOPR), considering only the first pregnancy for each couple. The power calculation revealed that 75 patients were required in each group, when assuming a 50% cOPR with four embryo transfers in the vitrification Day 3 group vs two transfers in the vitrification Day 5/6 group. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Patients <38 years undergoing their first or second OR cycles were randomized at the start of the first cycle. Up to two cycles were included in the analysis. A fresh embryo transfer was performed on Day 3. Supernumerary embryos (with ≥6 cells, <25% fragmentation, and equal blastomeres) or blastocysts (with expansion grade ≥2 with inner cell mass and trophectoderm score A/B) were vitrified on Day 3 or Day 5/6, respectively, and then transferred at a later date. A time-to-event analysis was performed with the patient's first ongoing pregnancy as the event of interest and the number of embryo transfers as the time component. The statistical comparison was performed by a Cox proportional hazards model. Cumulative costs of vitrification on Day 3 vs Day 5/6 were explored and compared using Mann-Whitney U tests. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: By December 2021, 233 transfers (96 fresh and 137 frozen) in 77 patients were performed in the vitrification Day 3 group and 201 transfers (88 fresh and 113 frozen) in 77 patients were performed in the vitrification Day 5/6 group. The time-to-event analysis did not show a difference between the two arms with regard to the patient's first ongoing pregnancy as the primary study outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 1.25, 95% CI 0.82; 1.92, P = 0.30). The cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate after eight transfers (from one or two ORs) was 57% in the vitrification Day 3 group vs 58% in the vitrification Day 5/6 group. The median number of embryo transfers until a pregnancy was achieved was five vs four, respectively, in the vitrification Day 3 group vs the Day 5/6 group. Similar results were found for the secondary study outcome, i.e. clinical pregnancy with foetal heart rate (HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.78; 1.80, P = 0.41). The cumulative clinical pregnancy rate (cCPR) after eight embryo transfers was 62% in the vitrification Day 3 group vs 59% in the vitrification Day 5/6 group. The median number of transfers until a pregnancy was achieved was four in both groups. The healthcare consumption pattern differed between the two groups and we observed higher costs for the vitrification Day 3 group compared to the vitrification Day 5/6 group, although these differences were not statistically significant. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Although our power calculation revealed that only 75 patients were needed in each study group (ß = 0.87, α < 0.05), the numbers were low. Also, different numbers of single and double embryo transfers were performed between the two groups, which may have affected the results. The cost analysis was performed on a subset of the patients and is therefore exploratory. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our study shows no difference in the cumulative pregnancy rate nor costs after fresh and frozen embryo transfers of at most two sequential OR cycles between the Day 3 and Day 5/6 vitrification groups; however, obstetric and perinatal outcomes should be taken into account to determine the best strategy. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded as an investigator-sponsored study of S.D. by Merck nv/sa Belgium, an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany, and by Gedeon Richter Benelux (PA18-0162). The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04196036. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 15 January 2018. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 15 January 2018.

An exploratory analysis of the cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 units/mL versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL over a lifetime horizon using the BRAVO diabetes model.

BACKGROUND: This analysis assessed the cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL (Gla-100) in insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). METHODS: Costs and outcomes for Gla-300 versus Gla-100 from a US healthcare payer perspective were assessed using the BRAVO diabetes model. Baseline clinical data were derived from EDITION-3, a 12-month randomized controlled trial comparing Gla-300 with Gla-100 in insulin-naïve adults with inadequately controlled T2D on OADs. Treatment costs were calculated based on doses observed in EDITION-3 and 2020 US net prices, while costs for complications were based on published literature. Lifetime costs ($US) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were predicted and used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) estimates; extensive scenario and sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Lifetime medical costs were estimated to be $353,441 and $352,858 for individuals receiving Gla-300 and Gla-100 respectively; insulin costs were $52,613 and $50,818. Gla-300 was associated with a gain of 8.97 QALYs and 21.12 life-years, while Gla-100 was associated with a gain of 8.89 QALYs and 21.07 life-years. This resulted in an ICER of $7522/QALY gained for Gla-300 versus Gla-100. Thus, Gla-300 was cost-effective versus Gla-100 based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY. Compared with Gla-100, Gla-300 provided a net monetary benefit of $3290. Scenario and sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the base case. CONCLUSION: Gla-300 may be a cost-effective treatment option versus Gla-100 over a lifetime horizon for insulin-naïve people in the United States with T2D inadequately controlled on OADs.

Estimation of the direct health and indirect societal costs of diabetes in the UK using a cost of illness model.

AIMS: The direct cost of diabetes to the UK health system was estimated at around £10 billion in 2012. This analysis updates that estimate using more recent and accurate data sources. METHODS: A pragmatic review of relevant data sources for UK nations was conducted, including population-level data sets and published literature, to generate estimates of costs separately for Type 1, Type 2 and gestational diabetes. A comprehensive cost framework, developed in collaboration with experts, was used to create a population-based cost of illness model. The key driver of the analysis was prevalence of diabetes and its complications. Estimates were made of the excess costs of diagnosis, treatment and diabetes-related complications compared with the general UK population. Estimates of the indirect costs of diabetes focused on productivity losses due to absenteeism and premature mortality. RESULTS: The direct costs of diabetes in 2021/22 for the UK were estimated at £10.7 billion, of which just over 40% related to diagnosis and treatment, with the rest relating to the excess costs of complications. Indirect costs were estimated at £3.3 billion. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes remains a considerable cost burden in the UK, and the majority of those costs are still spent on potentially preventable complications. Although rates of some complications are reducing, prevalence continues to increase and effective approaches to primary and secondary prevention continue to be needed. Improvements in data capture, data quality and reporting, and further research on the human and financial implications of increasing incidence of Type 2 diabetes in younger people are recommended.

Post-pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis after pancreatoduodenectomy: Analysis of a clinically-relevant complication in a single-center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: /Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the frequency, clinical impact, and risk factors of post-pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis (PPAP) after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) according to the definition proposed by the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). METHODS: patients undergoing PD between 2010 and 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. PPAP was defined according to the ISGPS criteria, including elevated serum amylase for 48 h and concurring pancreatitis alterations on a CT scan. RESULTS: 272 patients were finally included in the study. PPAP occurred in 40 (14.7 %) patients, and it was significantly related to higher rates of clinically-relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) (p < 0.001), post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH) (p < 0.001) and major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3a) (p < 0.001). Moreover, PPAP in the absence of CR-POPF (n = 18) was significantly related to longer hospital stay (p < 0.001), PPH (p < 0.001), major complications (Clavien-Dindo≥ 3a, p = 0.001) and higher intensive care unit costs (p = 0.029) compared to patients not developing PPAP. In the univariable and multivariable analysis, the duct size (p = 0.004) and high-risk pathologies (p = 0.004) but not intraoperative bleeding (p = 0.066) represented independent risk factors for PPAP. In the same analysis, patients receiving a bridging therapy with low molecular-weight heparin showed significantly lower rates of PPAP (p = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: PPAP represents a relevant complication after PD. Its risk factors are similar to those for CR-POPF, while anticoagulants could represent a possible prevention strategy.

Cost of implementing HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis at community-based clinics in Indonesia.

INTRODUCTION: Currently, Indonesia still has one of the highest rates of new HIV/AIDS infections among countries in Asia and the Pacific region. The WHO has recommended pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) as an additional HIV epidemic prevention step, which has been applied globally and related to the reduction in the number of HIV cases. However, information on the cost of implementing PrEP is rarely available in developing countries, especially in Southeast Asia. Designing a cost-effective approach to scale up PrEP and to estimate the potential budget impact requires information on the cost of implementing PrEP. This study aims to estimate the cost of implementing PrEP at community-based clinics in Indonesia. METHODS: We collected healthcare and non-healthcare/client costs from nine community-based clinics in various cities/districts in Indonesia. The healthcare costs included data on resource utilisation and costs to deliver PrEP, divided into recurrent and capital costs using a discount rate of 3%. Non-healthcare costs included out-of-pocket costs (e.g., transportation, meals) and productivity loss by clients and accompanying person(s) in accessing PrEP. On average, we interviewed 27 clients/clinic. RESULTS: The annual cost of providing PrEP per client is US $365.03, 39% lower than the yearly cost of antiretroviral treatment (ART) per person (approximately US $600). Drugs and non-healthcare costs contribute approximately 67% of the cost. The cost of PrEP amounts to US $292,756.45/year, covering 802 clients. The non-healthcare cost per visit at all sites never reaches more than 10% of the average monthly household expenditure. CONCLUSIONS: The cost of providing PrEP per person is approximately US $365 and is 39% lower than the annual cost of ART per person. Lowering the cost of PrEP ARV drugs would reduce the cost. Scaling up PrEP should recognise this cost structure and strive to reach economies of scale as the intervention gains more clients while simultaneously controlling new HIV infections.

Clinical and economic impact of the introduction of pre-biopsy MRI-based assessment on a large prostate cancer centre diagnostic population and activity: 10 years on.

INTRODUCTION: Prostate mpMRI was introduced in 2011 as a secondary test and subsequently integrated into a prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostics unit representing a population of approximately 550,000 people. The following represents an audit of its step-wise introduction between 2 index years, 2009 and 2018, focusing on the activity, patient outcomes and economic benefits. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The 2 distinct years were selected for relying on a transrectal ultrasound biopsy pathway in 2009 to an mpMRI-based pathway in 2018. All referrals were retrospectively screened and compared for age, PSA levels, DRE findings, biopsy history, biopsy and mpMRI allocation data. Cost analysis was determined using local unit procedure costs. RESULTS: Patients referred included 648 in 2009 and 714 in 2018. mpMRI seldomly informed decision to biopsy in 2009 (9.8%), while in 2018 it was performed in the pre-biopsy setting in 87.9% cases and enabled biopsy avoidance in 137 patients. In 2018, there was a 31.8% decrease in the number of biopsies in patients without previous PCa diagnosis, coupled with an increase in diagnostic rates of csPCa, from 28.6 to 49.0% (p < 0.0001) and a reduction in negative biopsy rates from 52.3 to 33.8%. mpMRI had a positive impact on the system with reduced patient morbidity and post-procedural complications. The estimated overall cost savings amount to approximately £75,000/year for PCa diagnosis and £11,000/year due to reduced complications. CONCLUSION: Our evaluation shows the mpMRI-based pathway has improved early detection of csPCa and reduction of repeat biopsies, resulting in significant financial benefits for the local healthcare system.

A Cost-Consequence Analysis Comparing Balloon-Expandable Covered Stents for the Management of Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease.

PURPOSE: To compare procedural and long-term costs associated with the use of Balloon-Expandable Covered Stents (BECS) in the management of Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease (AIOD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cost-consequence model was developed to simulate the intra- and post-operative management of patients with AIOD from the perspective of private health-payers. The study assessed the costs of the LifeStream (BD, Franklin Lakes, New Jersey), iCAST/Advanta V12 (Getinge, Goteborg, Sweden), BeGraft Peripheral (Bentley, Hechingen, Germany), and Viabahn Balloon Expandable (VBX) (W.L. Gore, Flagstaff, Arizona) BECS devices. Device costs were identified from the Australian Prosthesis List, whereas clinical outcomes of BECS were estimated from a systematic review of the literature. Costs were calculated over 24 and 36 month time horizons and reported in US dollars. RESULTS: Long-term, per-patient cost of each device at 24 and 36 months was $6253/$6634 for the LifeStream; $6359/$6869 for the iCAST/Advanta V12; $4806 (data available to 24 months) for the BeGraft Peripheral; and $4839/$5046 for the Viabahn VBX, respectively. Most of the cost difference was attributed to the number of stents required per treated limb and frequency of clinically-driven target lesion revascularization events. CONCLUSIONS: Best-available clinical evidence and economic modeling demonstrates that the BeGraft Peripheral and Viabahn VBX were of similar cost and the least costly options at 24 months, whereas at 36 months, the lowest cost BECS option for the treatment of AIOD was the Viabahn VBX. CLINICAL IMPACT: This analysis supports economically informed decision-making for health-payers managing systems that care for patients with AIOD. Stent length and avoiding reintervention were identified as key areas of cost-saving for future BECS development.

Wound vacuum-assisted closure temporization after tumor resection of soft tissue sarcomas-A cost analysis in a propensity-score matched population.

BACKGROUND: Vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) temporization is a technique associated with high local control rates used in myxofibrosarcoma. We sought to compare the costs and postoperative outcomes of VAC temporization and single-stage (SS) excision/reconstruction. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with myxofibrosarcoma surgically treated at our institution between 2000 and 2022. Variables of interest included total, direct, and indirect costs for initial episode of care, 90 days and 1 year after initial admission, and postoperative outcomes. Costs were compared between the VAC temporization and SS groups. RESULTS: After matching, 13 patients in the SS group and 23 in the VAC group were analyzed. We found no difference in median and mean total inpatient costs, between the VAC temporization and SS group. While total 90-day and 1-year costs were higher in the VAC group compared to the SS group, mean costs were similar. There were no differences in postoperative complications between groups. A subanalysis of the entire cohort (n = 139) revealed lower local recurrence and overall death rates in the VAC temporization group. CONCLUSION: VAC temporization had similar inpatient costs and postoperative outcomes to SS excision/reconstruction. While median 90-day and 1-year costs were higher in the VAC group, mean costs did not differ.

Cost and Utility Estimates per Modified Rankin Scale Score up to 2 Years Post Stroke: Data to Inform Economic Evaluations From a Societal Perspective.

OBJECTIVES: Model-based health economic evaluations of ischemic stroke are in need of cost- and utility estimates related to relevant outcome measures. This study aims to describe societal cost- and utility estimates per modified Rankin Scale (mRS)-score at different time points within 2 years post stroke. METHODS: Included patients had a stroke between 3 months and 2.5 years ago. mRS and EQ-5D-5L were scored during a telephone interview. Based on the interview date, records were categorized into a time point: 3 months (3M; 3-6 months), 1 year (Y1; 6-18 months), or 2 years (Y2; 18-30 months). Patients completed a questionnaire on healthcare utilization and productivity losses in the previous 3 months. Initial stroke hospitalization costs were assessed. Mean costs and utilities per mRS and time point were derived with multiple imputation nested in bootstrapping. Cost at 3 months post stroke were estimated separately for endovascular treatment (EVT)-/non-EVT-patients. RESULTS: 1106 patients were included from 18 Dutch centers. At each time point, higher mRS-scores were associated with increasing average costs and decreasing average utility. Mean societal costs at 3M ranged from €11 943 (mRS 1, no EVT) to €55 957 (mRS 5, no EVT). For Y1, mean costs in the previous 3 months ranged from €885 (mRS 0) to €23 215 (mRS 5), and from €1655 (mRS 0) to €22 904 (mRS 5) for Y2. Mean utilities ranged from 0.07 to 0.96, depending on mRS and time point. CONCLUSIONS: The mRS-score is a major determinant of costs and utilities at different post-stroke time points. Our estimates may be used to inform future model-based health economic evaluations.

Projecting the economic burden of type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus in Germany from 2010 until 2040.

BACKGROUND: The aim is to estimate age- and sex-specific direct medical costs related to diagnosed type 1 and type 2 diabetes in Germany between 2010 and 2040. METHODS: Based on nationwide representative epidemiological routine data from 2010 from the statutory health insurance in Germany (almost 80% of the population's insurance) we projected age- and sex-specific healthcare expenses for type 1 and 2 diabetes considering future demographic, disease-specific and cost trends. We combine per capita healthcare cost data (obtained from aggregated claims data from an almost 7% random sample of all German people with statutory health insurance) together with the demographic structure of the German population (obtained from the Federal Statictical Office), diabetes prevalence, incidence and mortality. Direct per capita costs, total annual costs, cost ratios for people with versus without diabetes and attributable costs were estimated. The source code for running the analysis is publicly available in the open-access repository Zenodo. RESULTS: In 2010, total healthcare costs amounted to more than €1 billion for type 1 and €28 billion for type 2 diabetes. Depending on the scenario, total annual expenses were projected to rise remarkably until 2040 compared to 2010, by 1-281% for type 1 (€1 to €4 billion) and by 8-364% for type 2 diabetes (€30 to €131 billion). In a relatively probable scenario total costs amount to about €2 and €79 billion for type 1 and type 2 diabetes in 2040, respectively. Depending on annual cost growth (1% p.a. as realistic scenario vs. 5% p.a. as very extreme setting), we estimated annual per capita costs of €6,581 to €12,057 for type 1 and €5,245 to €8,999 for type 2 diabetes in 2040. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes imposes a large economic burden on Germany which is projected to increase substantially until 2040. Temporal trends in the incidence and cost growth are main drivers of this increase. This highlight the need for urgent action to prepare for the potential development and mitigate its consequences.

Costs of distributing HIV self-testing kits in Eswatini through community and workplace models.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates the implementation and running costs of an HIV self-testing (HIVST) distribution program in Eswatini. HIVST kits were delivered through community-based and workplace models using primary and secondary distribution. Primary clients could self-test onsite or offsite. This study presents total running economic costs of kit distribution per model between April 2019 and March 2020, and estimates average cost per HIVST kit distributed, per client self-tested, per client self-tested reactive, per client confirmed positive, and per client initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART). METHODS: Distribution data and follow-up phone interviews were analysed to estimate implementation outcomes. Results were presented for each step of the care cascade using best-case and worst-case scenarios. A top-down incremental cost-analysis was conducted from the provider perspective using project expenditures. Sensitivity and scenario analyses explored effects of economic and epidemiological parameters on average costs. RESULTS: Nineteen thousand one hundred fifty-five HIVST kits were distributed to 13,031 individuals over a 12-month period, averaging 1.5 kits per recipient. 83% and 17% of kits were distributed via the community and workplace models, respectively. Clients reached via the workplace model were less likely to opt for onsite testing than clients in the community model (8% vs 29%). 6% of onsite workplace testers tested reactive compared to 2% of onsite community testers. Best-case scenario estimated 17,458 (91%) clients self-tested, 633 (4%) received reactive-test results, 606 (96%) linked to confirmatory testing, and 505 (83%) initiated ART. Personnel and HIVST kits represented 60% and 32% of total costs, respectively. Average costs were: per kit distributed US$17.23, per client tested US$18.91, per client with a reactive test US$521.54, per client confirmed positive US$550.83, and per client initiating ART US$708.60. Lower rates for testing, reactivity, and linkage to care in the worst-case scenario resulted in higher average costs along the treatment cascade. CONCLUSION: This study fills a significant evidence gap regarding costs of HIVST provision along the client care cascade in Eswatini. Workplace and community-based distribution of HIVST accompanied with effective linkage to care strategies can support countries to reach cascade objectives.

Potential healthcare resource use and associated costs of every 2 month injectable cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting regimen implementation in the Spanish National Healthcare System compared to daily oral HIV treatments.

INTRODUCTION: HIV treatment currently consists of daily oral antiretroviral therapy (ART). Cabotegravir + rilpivirine long-acting (CAB + RPV LA) is the first ART available in Spain administered every 2 months through intramuscular injection by a healthcare professional (HCP). The objective of this analysis was to assess potential healthcare resource use (HRU) and cost impact of implementing CAB + RPV LA vs. daily oral ART at National Health System (NHS) hospitals. METHODS: Online quantitative interviews and cost analysis were performed. Infectious disease specialists (IDS), hospital pharmacists (HP) and nurses were asked about their perception of potential differences in HRU between CAB + RPV LA vs. daily oral ART, among other concepts of interest. Spanish official tariffs were applied as unit costs to the HRU estimates (€2022). RESULTS: 120 responders (n = 40 IDS, n = 40 HP, n = 40 nurses) estimated an average number of annual visits per patient by speciality (IDS, HP, and nurse, respectively) of 3.3 vs. 3.7; 4.4 vs. 6.2; 6.1 vs. 3.9, for CAB + RPV LA vs. daily oral ART, and 3.0 vs. 3.2; 4.8 vs. 5.8; 6.9 vs. 4.9, respectively when adjusting by corresponding specialist responses. Estimation by the total sample led to an annual total cost per patient of €2,076 vs. €2,473, being €2,032 vs. €2,237 after adjusting by corresponding HCP, for CAB + RPV LA vs. daily oral ART. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the implementation of CAB + RPV LA in NHS hospitals would not incur in increased HRU-related costs compared to current daily oral ARTs, being potentially neutral or even cost-saving.