Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of point-of-care C-reactive protein tests for respiratory tract infection in primary care in England.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Despite recommendations that general practitioners (GPs) delay antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections (RTIs), antibiotic prescriptions in primary care in England increased by 4.1% from 2010 to 2013. C-reactive protein (CRP) point-of-care tests (POCT), for example, the Afinion™ Analyzer (Alere Ltd, Stockport, UK) device, are widely used in several countries in the European Union. Studies suggest that CRP POCT use, either alone or in combination with communication training, reduces antibiotic prescribing and improves quality of life for patients presenting with RTI symptoms. The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CRP POCT for RTIs in primary care in England over 3 years for three different strategies of care compared to standard practice.

Methods

An economic evaluation was carried out to compare the costs and benefits of three different strategies of CRP testing (GP plus CRP; practice nurse plus CRP; and GP plus CRP and communication training) for patients with RTI symptoms as defined by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline CG69, compared with current standard GP practice without CRP testing. Analysis consisted of a decision tree and Markov model to describe the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost per 100 patients, together with the number of antibiotic prescriptions and RTIs for each group.

Results

Compared with current standard practice, the GP plus CRP and practice nurse plus CRP test strategies result in increased QALYs and reduced costs, while the GP plus CRP testing and communication training strategy is associated with increased costs and reduced QALYs. Additionally, all three CRP arms led to fewer antibiotic prescriptions and infections over 3 years.

Conclusion

The additional cost per patient of the CRP test is outweighed by the associated cost savings and QALY increment associated with a reduction in infections in the long term.

SUBMITTER: Hunter R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4311066 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe use of point of care (POC) tests varies across Europe, but research into what drives this variability is lacking. Focusing on CRP POC tests, we aimed to understand what factors contribute to high versus low adoption of the tests, and also to explore whether they are used in children.MethodsWe used a comparative qualitative case study approach to explore the implementation of CRP POC tests in the Netherlands and England. These countries were selected because although they have similar primary healthcare systems, the availability of CRP POC tests in General Practices is very different, being very high in the former and rare in the latter. The study design and analysis were informed by the non-adoption, abandonment, spread, scale-up and sustainability (NASSS) framework. Data were collected through a review of documents and interviews with stakeholders. Documents were identified through a scoping literature review, search of websites, and stakeholder recommendation. Stakeholders were selected purposively initially, and then by snowballing. Data were analysed thematically.ResultsSixty-five documents were reviewed and 21 interviews were conducted. The difference in the availability of CRP POC tests is mainly because of differences at the wider national context level. In the two countries, early adopters of the tests advocated for their implementation through the generation of robust evidence and by engaging with all relevant stakeholders. This led to the inclusion of CRP POC tests in clinical guidelines in both countries. In the Netherlands, this mandated their reimbursement in accordance with Dutch regulations. Moreover, the prevailing better integration of health services enabled operational support from laboratories to GP practices. In England, the funding constraints of the National Health Service and the prioritization of alternative and less expensive antimicrobial stewardship interventions prevented the development of a reimbursement scheme. In addition, the lack of integration between health services limits the operational support to GP practices. In both countries, the availability of CRP POC tests for the management of children is a by-product of the test being available for adults. The tests are less used in children mainly because of concerns regarding their accuracy in this age-group.ConclusionsThe engagement of early adopters combined with a more favourable and receptive macro level environment, including the role of clinical guidelines and their developers in determining which interventions are reimbursed and the operational support from laboratories to GP practices, led to the greater adoption of the tests in the Netherlands. In both countries, CRP POC tests, when available, are less used less in children. Organisations considering introducing POC tests into primary care settings need to consider how their implementation fits into the wider health system context to ensure achievable plans.

Project description:ObjectivesUtilisation of point-of-care C-reactive protein testing for lower respiratory tract infection has been limited in UK primary care, with costs and funding suggested as important barriers. We aimed to use existing National Health Service funding and policy mechanisms to alleviate these barriers and engage with clinicians and healthcare commissioners to encourage implementation.DesignA mixed-methods study design was adopted, including a qualitative survey to identify clinicians' and commissioners' perceived benefits, barriers and enablers post-implementation, and quantitative analysis of results from a real-world implementation study.InterventionsWe developed a funding specification to underpin local reimbursement of general practices for test delivery based on an item of service payment. We also created training and administrative materials to facilitate implementation by reducing organisational burden. The implementation study provided intervention sites with a testing device and supplies, training and practical assistance.ResultsDespite engagement with several groups, implementation and uptake of our funding specification were limited. Survey respondents confirmed costs and funding as important barriers in addition to physical and operational constraints and cited training and the value of a local champion as enablers.ConclusionsAlthough survey respondents highlighted the clinical benefits, funding remains a barrier to implementation in UK primary care and appears not to be alleviated by the existing financial incentives available to commissioners. The potential to meet incentive targets using lower cost methods, a lack of policy consistency or competing financial pressures and commissioning programmes may be important determinants of local priorities. An implementation champion could help to catalyse support and overcome operational barriers at the local level, but widespread implementation is likely to require national policy change. Successful implementation may reproduce antibiotic prescribing reductions observed in research studies.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine if use of point of care testing (POCT) is less costly than laboratory testing to the National Health Service (NHS) in delivering the NHS Health Check (NHSHC) programme in the primary care setting.DesignObservational study and theoretical mathematical model with microcosting approach.SettingWe collected data on NHSHC delivered at nine general practices (seven using POCT; two not using POCT).ParticipantsWe recruited nine general practices offering NHSHC and a pathology services laboratory in the same area.MethodsWe conducted mathematical modelling with permutations in the following fields: provider type (healthcare assistant or nurse), type of test performed (total cholesterol with either lab fasting glucose or HbA1c), cost of consumables and variable uptake rates, including rate of non-response to invite letter and rate of missed [did not attend (DNA)] appointments. We calculated total expected cost (TEC) per 100 invites, number of NHSHC conducted per 100 invites and costs for completed NHSHC for laboratory and POCT-based pathways. A univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to account for uncertainty in the input parameters.Main outcome measuresWe collected data on cost, volume and type of pathology services performed at seven general practices using POCT and a pathology services laboratory. We collected data on response to the NHSHC invitation letter and DNA rates from two general practices.ResultsTEC of using POCT to deliver a routine NHSHC is lower than the laboratory-led pathway with savings of £29 per 100 invited patients up the point of cardiovascular disease risk score presentation. Use of POCT can deliver NHSHC in one sitting, whereas the laboratory pathway offers patients several opportunities to DNA appointment.ConclusionsTEC of using POCT to deliver an NHSHC in the primary care setting is lower than the laboratory-led pathway. Using POCT minimises DNA rates associated with laboratory testing and enables completion of NHSHC in one sitting.

Project description:Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infections (UTIs) are common in primary care resulting in substantial costs. Since antimicrobial resistance against antibiotics for UTIs is rising, accurate diagnosis is needed in settings with low rates of multidrug-resistant bacteria.To compare the cost-effectiveness of different strategies to diagnose UTIs in women who contacted their general practitioner (GP) with painful and/or frequent micturition between 2006 and 2008 in and around Amsterdam, The Netherlands.This is a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis using data from 196 women who underwent four tests: history, urine stick, sediment, dipslide, and the gold standard, a urine culture. Decision trees were constructed reflecting 15 diagnostic strategies comprising different parallel and sequential combinations of the four tests. Using the decision trees, for each strategy the costs and the proportion of women with a correct positive or negative diagnosis were estimated. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to estimate uncertainty surrounding costs and effects. Uncertainty was presented using cost-effectiveness planes and acceptability curves.Most sequential testing strategies resulted in higher proportions of correctly classified women and lower costs than parallel testing strategies. For different willingness to pay thresholds, the most cost-effective strategies were: 1) performing a dipstick after a positive history for thresholds below €10 per additional correctly classified patient, 2) performing both a history and dipstick for thresholds between €10 and €17 per additional correctly classified patient, 3) performing a dipstick if history was negative, followed by a sediment if the dipstick was negative for thresholds between €17 and €118 per additional correctly classified patient, 4) performing a dipstick if history was negative, followed by a dipslide if the dipstick was negative for thresholds above €118 per additional correctly classified patient.Depending on decision makers' willingness to pay for one additional correctly classified woman, the strategy consisting of performing a history and dipstick simultaneously (ceiling ratios between €10 and €17) or performing a sediment if history and subsequent dipstick are negative (ceiling ratios between €17 and €118) are the most cost-effective strategies to diagnose a UTI.