Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to primary care for influenza-like-illness: economic evaluation alongside the randomised controlled ALIC⁴E trial in 15 European countries.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Oseltamivir is usually not often prescribed (or reimbursed) for non-high-risk patients consulting for influenza-like-illness (ILI) in primary care in Europe. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to usual primary care in adults/adolescents (13 years +) and children with ILI during seasonal influenza epidemics, using data collected in an open-label, multi-season, randomised controlled trial of oseltamivir in 15 European countries.

Methods

Direct and indirect cost estimates were based on patient reported resource use and official country-specific unit costs. Health-Related Quality of Life was assessed by EQ-5D questionnaires. Costs and quality adjusted life-years (QALY) were bootstrapped (N = 10,000) to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), from both the healthcare payers' and the societal perspectives, with uncertainty expressed through probabilistic sensitivity analysis and expected value for perfect information (EVPI) analysis. Additionally, scenario (self-reported spending), comorbidities subgroup and country-specific analyses were performed.

Results

The healthcare payers' expected ICERs of oseltamivir were €22,459 per QALY gained in adults/adolescents and €13,001 in children. From the societal perspective, oseltamivir was cost-saving in adults/adolescents, but the ICER is €8,344 in children. Large uncertainties were observed in subgroups with comorbidities, especially for children. The expected ICERs and extent of decision uncertainty varied between countries (EVPI ranged €1-€35 per patient).

Conclusion

Adding oseltamivir to primary usual care in Europe is likely to be cost-effective for treating adults/adolescents and children with ILI from the healthcare payers' perspective (if willingness-to-pay per QALY gained > €22,459) and cost-saving in adults/adolescents from a societal perspective.

SUBMITTER: Li X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10290610 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to primary care for influenza-like-illness: economic evaluation alongside the randomised controlled ALIC<sup>4</sup>E trial in 15 European countries.

Li Xiao X Bilcke Joke J van der Velden Alike W AW Bruyndonckx Robin R Coenen Samuel S Bongard Emily E de Paor Muirrean M Chlabicz Slawomir S Godycki-Cwirko Maciek M Francis Nick N Aabenhus Rune R Bucher Heiner C HC Colliers Annelies A De Sutter An A Garcia-Sangenis Ana A Glinz Dominik D Harbin Nicolay J NJ Kosiek Katarzyna K Lindbæk Morten M Lionis Christos C Llor Carl C Mikó-Pauer Réka R Radzeviciene Jurgute Ruta R Seifert Bohumil B Sundvall Pär-Daniel PD Touboul Lundgren Pia P Tsakountakis Nikolaos N Verheij Theo J TJ Goossens Herman H Butler Christopher C CC Beutels Philippe P

The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care 20220922 6

<h4>Background</h4>Oseltamivir is usually not often prescribed (or reimbursed) for non-high-risk patients consulting for influenza-like-illness (ILI) in primary care in Europe. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to usual primary care in adults/adolescents (13 years +) and children with ILI during seasonal influenza epidemics, using data collected in an open-label, multi-season, randomised controlled trial of oseltamivir in 15 European countries.<h4>Methods</h4>Dire ...[more]

PMID: 36131214

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectiveInfluenza-like illness (ILI) leads to a substantial disease burden every winter in Europe; however, oseltamivir is not frequently prescribed to ILI patients in the primary-care setting. An open-label, multi-country, multi-season, randomised controlled trial investigated the effectiveness of oseltamivir for treating ILI in 15 European countries. We aimed to evaluate whether patients presenting with ILI in primary care and being managed with the addition of oseltamivir to usual care had lower average direct and indirect costs compared to patients with usual care alone.MethodsResource use data were extracted from participants' daily diaries. Itemised country-specific unit costs were collected through official tariffs, pharmacies or literature. Costs were converted to 2018 values. The null hypothesis was tested based on one-sided credible intervals (CrIs) obtained by bootstrapping. Base-case analysis estimated direct cost and productivity losses using itemised costed resource use and the human capital approach. Scenario analyses with self-reported spending rather than itemised costing were also performed.ResultsPatients receiving oseltamivir (N = 1306) reported fewer healthcare visits, medication uses, hospital attendances and paid-work hours lost than the other patients (N = 1298). Excluding the oseltamivir cost, the average direct costs were lower in patients treated with oseltamivir from all perspectives, but these differences were not statistically significant (perspective of patient: €17 [0-95% Crl: 16-19] vs. €24 [5-100% Crl: 18-29]; healthcare provider: €37 [28-67] vs. €44 [25-55]; healthcare payers: €54 [45-85] vs. €68 [45-81]; and society: €423 [399-478] vs. €451 [390-478]). Scenario and age-group analyses confirmed these findings, but with some between-country differences.ConclusionThe average direct and indirect costs were consistently lower in patients treated with oseltamivir than in patients without from four perspectives (excluding the oseltamivir cost). However, these differences were not statistically significant.

Project description:IntroductionEffective management of seasonal and pandemic influenza is a high priority internationally. Guidelines in many countries recommend antiviral treatment for older people and individuals with comorbidity at increased risk of complications. However, antivirals are not often prescribed in primary care in Europe, partly because its clinical and cost effectiveness has been insufficiently demonstrated by non-industry funded and pragmatic studies.Methods and analysisAntivirals for influenza-Like Illness? An rCt of Clinical and Cost effectiveness in primary CarE is a European multinational, multicentre, open-labelled, non-industry funded, pragmatic, adaptive-platform, randomised controlled trial. Initial trial arms will be best usual primary care and best usual primary care plus treatment with oseltamivir for 5 days. We aim to recruit at least 2500 participants ≥1 year presenting with influenza-like illness (ILI), with symptom duration ≤72 hours in primary care over three consecutive periods of confirmed high influenza incidence. Participant outcomes will be followed up to 28 days by diary and telephone. The primary objective is to determine whether adding antiviral treatment to best usual primary care is effective in reducing time to return to usual daily activity with fever, headache and muscle ache reduced to minor severity or less. Secondary objectives include estimating cost-effectiveness, benefits in subgroups according to age (<12, 12-64 and >64 years), severity of symptoms at presentation (low, medium and high), comorbidity (yes/no), duration of symptoms (≤48 hours/>48-72 hours), complications (hospital admission and pneumonia), use of additional prescribed medication including antibiotics, use of over-the-counter medicines and self-management of ILI symptoms.Ethics and disseminationResearch ethics committee (REC) approval was granted by the NRES Committee South Central (Oxford B) and Clinical Trial Authority (CTA) approval by The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. All participating countries gained national REC and CTA approval as required. Dissemination of results will be through peer-reviewed scientific journals and conference presentations.Trial registration numberISRCTN27908921; Pre-results.

Project description:IntroductionEconomic evaluations of tobacco control policies targeting adolescents are scarce. Few take into account real-world, large-scale implementation costs; few compare cost-effectiveness of different policies across different countries. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of five tobacco control policies (nonschool bans, including bans on sales to minors, bans on smoking in public places, bans on advertising at points-of-sale, school smoke-free bans, and school education programs), implemented in 2016 in Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Italy, and Portugal.MethodsCost-effectiveness estimates were calculated per country and per policy, from the State perspective. Costs were collected by combining quantitative questionnaires with semi-structured interviews on how policies were implemented in each setting, in real practice. Short-term effectiveness was based on the literature, and long-term effectiveness was modeled using the DYNAMO-HIA tool. Discount rates of 3.5% were used for costs and effectiveness. Sensitivity analyses considered 1%-50% short-term effectiveness estimates, highest cost estimates, and undiscounted effectiveness.FindingsNonschool bans cost up to €253.23 per healthy life year, school smoking bans up to €91.87 per healthy life year, and school education programs up to €481.35 per healthy life year. Cost-effectiveness depended on the costs of implementation, short-term effectiveness, initial smoking rates, dimension of the target population, and weight of smoking in overall mortality and morbidity.ConclusionsAll five policies were highly cost-effective in all countries according to the World Health Organization thresholds for public health interventions. Cost-effectiveness was preserved even when using the highest costs and most conservative effectiveness estimates.ImplicationsEconomic evaluations using real-world data on tobacco control policies implemented at a large scale are scarce, especially considering nonschool bans targeting adolescents. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of five tobacco control policies implemented in 2016 in Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Italy, and Portugal. This study shows that all five policies were highly cost-effective considering the World Health Organization threshold, even when considering the highest costs and most conservative effectiveness estimates.

Project description:BackgroundWith an increasing burden of non-communicable disease in Nepal and limited progress towards universal health coverage, country- and disease-specific estimates of financial hardship related to healthcare costs need to be evaluated to protect the population effectively from healthcare-related financial burden.ObjectivesTo estimate the cost and economic burden of illness and to assess the inequality in the financial burden due to catastrophic health expenditure from 1995 to 2010 in Nepal.MethodsThis study used nationally representative Nepal Living Standards Surveys conducted in 1995 and 2010. A Bayesian two-stage hurdle model was used to estimate average cost of illness and Bayesian logistic regression models were used to estimate the disease-specific incidence of catastrophic health payment and impoverishment. The concentration curve and index were estimated by disease category to examine inequality in healthcare-related financial hardship.FindingsInflation-adjusted mean out-of-pocket (OOP) payments for chronic illness and injury increased by 4.6% and 7.3%, respectively, while the cost of recent acute illness declined by 1.5% between 1995 and 2010. Injury showed the highest incidence of catastrophic expenditure (30.7% in 1995 and 22.4% in 2010) followed by chronic illness (12.0% in 1995 and 9.6% in 2010) and recent acute illness (21.1% in 1995 and 7.8% in 2010). Asthma, diabetes, heart conditions, malaria, jaundice and parasitic illnesses showed increased catastrophic health expenditure over time. Impoverishment due to injury declined most (by 12% change in average annual rate) followed by recent acute illness (9.7%) and chronic illness (9.6%) in 15 years. Inequality analysis indicated that poorer populations with recent acute illness suffered more catastrophic health expenditure in both sample years, while wealthier households with injury and chronic illnesses suffered more catastrophic health expenditure in 2010.ConclusionTo minimize the economic burden of illness, several approaches need to be adopted, including social health insurance complemented with an upgraded community-based health insurance system, subsidy program expansion for diseases with high economic burden and third party liability motor insurance to reduce the economic burden of injury.

Project description:IntroductionIt is well-known that the prevalence of chronic diseases is high among older people, especially those who are poor. Moreover, chronic diseases can result in catastrophic health expenditure. The relationship between chronic diseases and their financial burden on households is thus double-sided, as financial difficulties can give rise to, and result from, chronic diseases. Our aim was to examine the levels of catastrophic health expenditure imposed by private out-of-pocket payments among older people diagnosed with diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases and cancer in 15 European countries.MethodsThe SHARE dataset for individuals aged 50+ and their households, collected in 2010-2012 was used. The total number of participants included in this study was N = 51,661. The sample consisted of 43.8% male and 56.2% female participants. The average age was 67 years. We applied an instrumental variable approach for binary instrumented variables known as a treatment-effect model.ResultsWe found that being diagnosed with diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular diseases was associated with catastrophic health expenditure among older people even in comparatively wealthy countries with developed risk-pooling mechanisms. When compared to the Netherlands (the country with the lowest share of out-of-pocket payments as a percentage of total health expenditure in our study), older people diagnosed with diabetes mellitus in Portugal, Poland, Denmark, Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, the Czech Republic and Hungary were more likely to experience catastrophic health expenditure. Similar results were observed for diagnosed cardiovascular diseases. In contrast, cancer was not associated with catastrophic health expenditure.DiscussionOur study shows that older people with diagnosed chronic diseases face catastrophic health expenditure even in some of the wealthiest countries in Europe. The effect differs across chronic diseases and countries. This may be due to different socio-economic contexts, but also due to the specific characteristics of the different health systems. In view of the ageing of European populations, it will be crucial to strengthen the mechanisms for financial protection for older people with chronic diseases.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to primary care for influenza-like-illness: economic evaluation alongside the randomised controlled ALIC⁴E trial in 15 European countries.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to primary care for influenza-like-illness: economic evaluation alongside the randomised controlled ALIC<sup>4</sup>E trial in 15 European countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to primary care for influenza-like-illness: economic evaluation alongside the randomised controlled ALIC4E trial in 15 European countries.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to primary care for influenza-like-illness: economic evaluation alongside the randomised controlled ALIC<sup>4</sup>E trial in 15 European countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets

Cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to primary care for influenza-like-illness: economic evaluation alongside the randomised controlled ALIC⁴E trial in 15 European countries.