Dataset Information

The cost-effectiveness of an HCV outreach intervention for at-risk populations in London, UK.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:HCV disproportionately affects marginalized communities such as homeless populations and people who inject drugs (PWID), posing a challenge to traditional health services. The HepFriend initiative in London is a model of care utilizing HCV outreach screening and peer support to link vulnerable individuals to HCV treatment in secondary care. OBJECTIVES:To assess the cost-effectiveness of the HepFriend initiative from a healthcare provider perspective, compared with standard-of-care pathways (consisting of testing in primary care and other static locations, including drug treatment centres, and linkage to secondary care). METHODS:Cost-effectiveness analysis using a dynamic HCV transmission and disease progression model among PWID and those who have ceased injecting, including housing status and drug treatment service contact. The model was parameterized using London-specific surveillance and survey data, and primary intervention cost and effectiveness data (September 2015 to June 2018). Out of 461 individuals screened, 197 were identified as HCV RNA positive, 180 attended secondary care and 89 have commenced treatment to date. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was determined using a 50?year time horizon. RESULTS:For a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20000 per QALY gained, the HepFriend initiative is cost-effective, with a mean ICER of £9408/QALY, and would become cost saving at 27% (£10525 per treatment) of the current drug list price. Results are robust to variations in intervention costs and model assumptions, and if treatment rates are doubled the intervention becomes more cost-effective (£8853/QALY). CONCLUSIONS:New models of care that undertake active case-finding with enhanced peer support to improve testing and treatment uptake amongst marginalized and vulnerable groups could be highly cost-effective and possibly cost saving.

SUBMITTER: Ward Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6883400 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The cost-effectiveness of an HCV outreach intervention for at-risk populations in London, UK.

Ward Zoe Z Campbell Linda L Surey Julian J Platts Steven S Glass Rachel R Hickman Matthew M Story Alistair A Vickerman Peter P

The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy 20191101 Suppl 5

<h4>Background</h4>HCV disproportionately affects marginalized communities such as homeless populations and people who inject drugs (PWID), posing a challenge to traditional health services. The HepFriend initiative in London is a model of care utilizing HCV outreach screening and peer support to link vulnerable individuals to HCV treatment in secondary care.<h4>Objectives</h4>To assess the cost-effectiveness of the HepFriend initiative from a healthcare provider perspective, compared with stand ...[more]

PMID: 31782503

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Less than 20% of adolescents globally meet recommended levels of physical activity, and not meeting these recommended levels is associated with social disadvantage and rising disease risk. The determinants of physical activity in adolescents are multilevel and poorly understood, but the school's social environment likely plays an important role. We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of a school-based programme (GoActive) to increase moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) among adolescents. METHODS AND FINDINGS:Non-fee-paying, co-educational schools including Year 9 students in the UK counties of Cambridgeshire and Essex were eligible for inclusion. Within participating schools (n = 16), all Year 9 students were eligible and invited to participate. Participants were 2,862 13- to 14-year-olds (84% of eligible students). After baseline assessment, schools were computer-randomised, stratified by school-level pupil premium funding (below/above county-specific median) and county (control: 8 schools, 1,319 participants, mean [SD] participants per school n = 165 [62]; intervention: 8 schools, 1,543 participants, n = 193 [43]). Measurement staff were blinded to allocation. The iteratively developed, feasibility-tested 12-week intervention, aligned with self-determination theory, trained older adolescent mentors and in-class peer-leaders to encourage classes to conduct 2 new weekly activities. Students and classes gained points and rewards for engaging in any activity in or out of school. The primary outcome was average daily minutes of accelerometer-assessed MVPA at 10-month follow-up; a mixed-methods process evaluation evaluated implementation. Of 2,862 recruited participants (52.1% male), 2,167 (76%) attended 10-month follow-up measurements; we analysed the primary outcome for 1,874 participants (65.5%). At 10 months, there was a mean (SD) decrease in MVPA of 8.3 (19.3) minutes in the control group and 10.4 (22.7) minutes in the intervention group (baseline-adjusted difference [95% confidence interval] -1.91 minutes [-5.53 to 1.70], p = 0.316). The programme cost £13 per student compared with control; it was not cost-effective. Overall, 62.9% of students and 87.3% of mentors reported that GoActive was fun. Teachers and mentors commented that their roles in programme delivery were unclear. Implementation fidelity was low. The main methodological limitation of this study was the relatively affluent and ethnically homogeneous sample. CONCLUSIONS:In this study, we observed that a rigorously developed school-based intervention was no more effective than standard school practice at preventing declines in adolescent physical activity. Interdisciplinary research is required to understand educational-setting-specific implementation challenges. School leaders and authorities should be realistic about expectations of the effect of school-based physical activity promotion strategies implemented at scale. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN31583496.

Project description:BackgroundHCV direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are produced in India at low cost. However, concerns surrounding reinfection and budgetary impact limit treatment scale-up in India. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budgetary impact of HCV treatment in India, including reinfection.MethodsA closed cohort Markov model of HCV disease progression, treatment, and reinfection was parameterized. We compared treatment by fibrosis stage (F2-F4 or F0-F4) to no treatment from a health care payer perspective. Costs (2017 USD$, based on India-specific data) and health utilities (in quality-adjusted life years, QALYs) were attached to each health state. We assumed DAAs with 90% sustained viral response at $900/treatment and 1%/year reinfection, varied in the sensitivity analysis from 0.1-15%. We deemed the intervention cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) fell below India's per capita GDP ($1,709). We assessed the budgetary impact of treating all diagnosed individuals.ResultsHCV treatment for diagnosed F2-F4 individuals was cost-saving (net costs -$2,881 and net QALYs 3.18/person treated; negative ICER) compared to no treatment. HCV treatment remained cost-saving with reinfection rates of 15%/year. Treating all diagnosed individuals was likely cost-effective compared to delay until F2 (mean ICER $1,586/QALY gained, 67% of simulations falling under the $1,709 threshold) with 1%/year reinfection. For all scenarios, annual retesting for reinfection was more cost-effective than the current policy (one-time retest). Treating all diagnosed individuals and reinfections results in net costs of $445-1,334 million over 5 years (<0.25% of total health care expenditure over 5 years), and cost-savings within 14 years.ConclusionsHCV treatment was highly cost-effective in India, despite reinfection. Annual retesting for reinfection was cost-effective, supporting a policy change towards more frequent retesting. A comprehensive HCV treatment scale-up plan is warranted in India.

Project description:ImportanceLatinx individuals have been disproportionately affected during the COVID-19 pandemic caused by the spread of SARS-CoV-2. It is imperative to evaluate newly developed preventive interventions to assess their effect on COVID-19 health disparities.ObjectiveTo examine the effectiveness of a culturally tailored outreach intervention designed to increase SARS-CoV-2 testing rates among Latinx populations.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cluster randomized trial performed from February 1 to August 31, 2021, in community settings in 9 Oregon counties, 38 sites were randomized a priori (19 to the community health promoters intervention and 19 to outreach as usual wait-listed controls). Thirty-three sites were activated. A total of 394 SARS-CoV-2 testing events were held and 1851 diagnostic samples collected, of which 919 were from Latinx persons.InterventionsA culturally informed outreach program was developed that made use of promotores de salud (community health promoters) to increase Latinx SARS-CoV-2 testing. Strategies addressed barriers by disseminating information on testing events in English and Spanish, mitigating misinformation, and increasing trust.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcomes were the count of sample tests from Latinx persons and the sampled proportion of the Latinx populace. Site-level covariates included census tract Latinx populace, nativity (number of US-born individuals per 100 population), median age, and income inequality. Time-varying covariates included number of new weekly SARS-CoV-2-positive cases and percentage of vaccine coverage at the county level.ResultsA total of 15 clusters (sites) were randomized to the control group and 18 to the community health promoters group. A total of 1851 test samples were collected, of which 995 (53.8%) were from female participants and 919 (49.6%) were from Latinx individuals. The intervention tested 3.84 (95% CI, 2.47-5.97) times more Latinx individuals per event than controls (incident rate ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.46-1.34; Cohen d = 0.74; P < .001). The intervention was associated with a 0.28 increase in the proportion of Latinx populace being tested compared with control sites for the dependent variable scaled as the proportion of the Latinx populace ×100, or a 0.003 proportion of the raw populace count. The use of a standardized scaling of the proportion of Latinx individuals showed that the relative percentage increase was 0.53 (95% CI, 0.21-0.86) in the intervention sites compared with controls, representing a medium effect size.Conclusions and relevanceTo our knowledge, this was the first randomized evaluation of an outreach intervention designed to increase SARS-CoV-2 testing among Latinx populations. Findings could be used to implement strategies to reduce other health disparities experienced by these groups.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04793464.

Dataset Information

The cost-effectiveness of an HCV outreach intervention for at-risk populations in London, UK.

Publications

The cost-effectiveness of an HCV outreach intervention for at-risk populations in London, UK.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure