Dataset Information

Economic costs of terminal care for selected non-communicable diseases from a healthcare perspective: a review of mortality records from a tertiary hospital in Nigeria.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

WHO revealed that morbidity and mortality from non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are on the increase and NCDs accounted for approximately 29% of all deaths in Nigeria in 2016. This study was conducted to estimate the economic cost of selected NCDs-lung cancer, liver cancer and liver cirrhosis. These diseases are known to be associated with key modifiable health risk behaviours (smoking and alcohol use), which are prevalent in Nigeria and often commence during the adolescent years.

Methods

Data were obtained between 2016 and 2017, from mortality records of patients managed for the selected diseases in the University College Hospital, a major referral centre in Nigeria. Information on costs of treatment, clinic visits, admission and transportation was obtained. Average costs of terminal in-patient care and transportation costs (in 2020 prices) were computed per patient. Costs were converted to the US dollar equivalent using the current official rate of US$1: ₦360.50.

Results

Twenty-two (out of 90 cases recorded) could be retrieved and all the patients had been diagnosed in the terminal stages of the disease. The average direct costs were ₦510 152.62 (US$1415.13) for an average of 49.2 days of terminal care for lung cancer; ₦308 950.27 (US$857.00) and ₦238 121.83 (US$660.53) for an average of 16.6 and 21.7 days of terminal care for patients managed for liver cancer and liver cirrhosis, respectively.

Conclusion

The economic costs of each of the diseases were very high. Findings emphasise the need for aggressive efforts to promote primary prevention, improve early diagnosis and provide affordable treatment in view of the fact that the monthly minimum wage is less than US$85.00 and treatment costs are borne out-of-pocket by the generality of the population in Nigeria.

SUBMITTER: Olumide AO

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8076932 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCigarette smoking is an established cause of preventable death and often initiated during adolescence. We estimated the short- and long-term costs of cigarette smoking among currently smoking adolescents in Nigeria.MethodsA cross-sectional survey among adolescents in Oyo state, Nigeria and a review of mortality records of patients managed for lung cancer in a tertiary facility in Ibadan, Nigeria were conducted. Short-term costs estimated were: (a) average weekly costs of purchasing cigarettes by currently smoking adolescents, and (b) costs of managing at least an episode of chronic cough occurring within 12 months of the survey. Long-term costs were limited to: (a) life-time expenditure on purchasing cigarettes, and (b) direct medical and non-medical (transportation) costs of managing lung cancer. Long-term costs were first projected to the approximate year when the adolescents (mean age:16.0 ± 1.8 years) might be diagnosed with lung cancer based on the average age at presentation with symptoms of lung cancer obtained from the records (59.8 years), and then discounted to 2020 prices. This was estimated as 44 years from the base year (2020). Costs were reported in 2020 prices in Nigerian Naira (NGN) and US dollar (USD) equivalent using the Central Bank of Nigeria, June 2020 exchange rate of USD 1: NGN 360.50.ResultsApproximately 3.8% of the adolescents were current cigarette smokers. Average weekly expenditure on cigarettes was NGN 306.82 ± 5.74 (USD 0.85 ± 0.02). About 26% had experienced at least an episode of chronic cough which cost them an average of NGN 1226.81 ± 6.18 (USD 3.40 ± 0.02) to manage. Total future costs of cigarette smoking in 2020 prices for the 43 adolescents who were current smokers in the event that they develop lung cancer were approximately NGN 175.7 million (USD 487.3 thousand), NGN 871.8 million (USD 2.4 million) and NGN 4.6 trillion (USD 12.7 million) at assumed annual inflation rates of 10%, 15%, and 20% respectively and discount rate of 4.25%.ConclusionThe estimated economic costs of smoking were very high. Efforts to prevent smoking initiation among adolescents in our study area should be intensified. Interventions to subsidize the medical cost of health-related consequences of cigarette smoking are also required, especially as treatment costs are currently largely borne out-of-pocket.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10389-021-01644-5.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The growing number of people living with life-limiting illness is a global health concern. This study therefore aimed to explore the involvement of pharmacists in selected tertiary hospitals in Nigeria in palliative care (PC). It also sought to evaluate their knowledge and attitude to PC as well as factors that hinder pharmacists' participation in PC. METHOD:Questionnaire-guided survey among pharmacists working in three-tertiary hospitals in southwestern Nigeria. The self-administered questionnaire comprised 18-item general knowledge questions related to PC, attitude statements with 5-point Likert-scale options and question-items that clarify extent of involvement in PC and barriers to participation. Overall score by pharmacists in the knowledge and attitude domains developed for the purpose of this study was assigned into binary categories of "adequate" and "inadequate" knowledge (score?>?75% versus?75%), as well as "positive" and "negative" attitude (ranked score?>?75% versus?75%), respectively. Descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney-U and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for analysis at p?<?0.05. RESULTS:All the 110 pharmacists enrolled responded to the questionnaire, given a response rate of 100%. Overall, our study showed that 23(21.1%) had adequate general knowledge in PC, while 14(12.8%) demonstrated positive attitude, with 45(41.3%) who enjoyed working in PC. Counselling on therapy adherence (100;90.9%) was the most frequently engaged activity by pharmacists; attending clinical meetings to advise health team members (45;40.9%) and giving educational sessions (47;42.7%) were largely cited as occasionally performed duties, while patient home visit was mostly cited (60;54.5%) as a duty not done at all. Pharmacists' unawareness of their need in PC (86;79.6%) was a major factor hindering participation, while pharmacists with PC training significantly felt more relaxed around people receiving PC compared to those without training (p?=?0.003). CONCLUSION:Hospital pharmacists in selected tertiary care institutions demonstrate inadequate knowledge, as well as negative attitude towards PC. Also, extent of involvement in core PC service is generally low, with pharmacists' unawareness of their need in PC constituting a major barrier. Thus, a need for inclusion of PC concept into pharmacy education curriculum, while mandatory professional development programme for pharmacists should also incorporate aspects detailing fundamental principles of PC, in order to bridge the knowledge and practice gaps.

Project description:BACKGROUND:In increasingly constrained healthcare budgets worldwide, efforts to improve quality and reduce costs are vital. Quality Improvement Collaboratives (QICs) are often used in healthcare settings to implement proven clinical interventions within local and national programs. The cost of this method of implementation, however, is cited as a barrier to use. This systematic review aims to identify and describe studies reporting on costs and cost-effectiveness of QICs when used to implement clinical guidelines in healthcare. METHODS:Multiple databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, EconLit and ProQuest) were searched for economic evaluations or cost studies of QICs in healthcare. Studies were included if they reported on economic evaluations or costs of QICs. Two authors independently reviewed citations and full text papers. Key characteristics of eligible studies were extracted, and their quality assessed against the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). Evers CHEC-List was used for full economic evaluations. Cost-effectiveness findings were interpreted through the Johanna Briggs Institute 'three by three dominance matrix tool' to guide conclusions. Currencies were converted to United States dollars for 2018 using OECD and World Bank databases. RESULTS:Few studies reported on costs or economic evaluations of QICs despite their use in healthcare. Eight studies across multiple healthcare settings in acute and long-term care, community addiction treatment and chronic disease management were included. Five were considered good quality and favoured the establishment of QICs as cost-effective implementation methods. The cost savings to the healthcare setting identified in these studies outweighed the cost of the collaborative itself. CONCLUSIONS:Potential cost savings to the health care system in both acute and chronic conditions may be possible by applying QICs at scale. However, variations in effectiveness, costs and elements of the method within studies, indicated that caution is needed. Consistent identification of costs and description of the elements applied in QICs would better inform decisions for their use and may reduce perceived barriers. Lack of studies with negative findings may have been due to publication bias. Future research should include economic evaluations with societal perspectives of costs and savings and the cost-effectiveness of elements of QICs. TRIAL REGISTRATION:PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018107417.