Distributional consequences of including survivor costs in economic evaluations.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kellerborg K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9292358 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Youth mental health interventions aimed at reducing substance use and delinquency in adolescents compete with other types of interventions for reimbursement from public funding. Within the youth mental health domain, delinquent acts impose high costs on society. These costs should be included in economic evaluations conducted from a societal perspective. Although the relevance of these costs is recognized, they are often left out because the unit costs of delinquent acts are unknown. AIMS OF THE STUDY:This study aims to provide a method for estimating the unit costs per perpetrator of 14 delinquent acts common in the Netherlands and included in self reported delinquency questionnaires: robbery/theft with violence, simple theft/pickpocketing, receiving stolen goods, destruction/vandalism of private or public property, disorderly conduct/discrimination, arson, cybercrime, simple and aggravated assault, threat, forced sexual contact, unauthorised driving, driving under the influence, dealing in soft drugs, and dealing in hard drugs. METHODS:Information on government expenditures and the incidence of crimes, number of perpetrators, and the percentage of solved and reported crimes was obtained from the national database on crime and justice of the Research and Documentation Centre of the Ministry of Justice and Security, Statistics Netherlands, and the Council for the Judiciary in the Netherlands. We applied a top-down micro costing approach to calculate the point estimate of the unit costs for each of the delinquent acts and, subsequently, estimated the mean (SD) unit costs for each of the delinquent acts by taking random draws from a triangular distribution while taking into account a 10% uncertainty associated with the associated point estimate. RESULTS:The mean (SD) unit costs per delinquent act per perpetrator ranged between EUR495 (EUR1.30) for "Driving under the influence" and EUR33,813 (EUR78.30) for a "Cybercrime". These unit costs may be considered as outliers as most unit costs ranged between EUR 2,600 and EUR 13,500 per delinquent act per perpetrator. DISCUSSION:This study is the first to estimate the unit costs per delinquent act per perpetrator in the Netherlands. The results of this study enable the inclusion of government expenditures associated with crime and justice in economic evaluations conducted from a societal perspective. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE:Youth mental health interventions aimed at reducing substance use and delinquency in adolescents are increasingly subjected to economic evaluations. These evaluations are used to inform decisions concerning the allocation of scarce healthcare resources and should cover all the costs and benefits for society, including those associated with delinquent acts. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES:The results of this study facilitate economic evaluations of youth mental health interventions aimed at reducing substance use and delinquency in adolescents, conducted from a societal perspective. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH:Based on health-economic evaluations conducted in the field of youth mental health and the results of the current study, we recommend including the estimated unit costs in guidelines for health-economic evaluations conducted from a societal perspective. Future research could aim at examining whether these unit costs require regular updating. The methodology applied in this study allows for this.
| S-EPMC6839943 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC7053095 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis study aims to conduct a systematic review of economic evaluations of COVID-19 interventions and to examine whether and how these studies incorporate non-health impacts and distributional concerns.MethodsWe searched the National Institutes of Health's COVID-19 Portfolio as of May 20, 2021, and supplemented our search with additional sources. We included original articles, including preprints, evaluating both the health and economic effects of a COVID-19-related intervention. Using a pre-specified data collection form, 2 reviewers independently screened, reviewed, and extracted information about the study characteristics, intervention types, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We used an Impact Inventory to catalog the types of non-health impacts considered.ResultsWe included 70 articles, almost half of which were preprints. Most articles (56%) included at least one non-health impact, but fewer (21%) incorporated non-economic consequences. Few articles (17%) examined subgroups of interest. After excluding negative ICERs, the median ICER for the entire sample (n = 243 ratios) was $67,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) (interquartile range [IQR] $9000-$893,000/QALY). Interventions including a pharmaceutical component yielded a median ICER of $93,000/QALY (IQR $4000-$7,809,000/QALY), whereas interventions including a non-pharmaceutical component were slightly more cost-effective overall with a median ICER of $81,000/QALY (IQR $12,000-$1,034,000/QALY). Interventions reported to be highly cost-effective were treatment, public information campaigns, quarantining identified contacts/cases, canceling public events, and social distancing.ConclusionsOur review highlights the lack of consideration of non-health and distributional impacts among COVID-19-related economic evaluations. Accounting for non-health impacts and distributional effects is essential for comprehensive assessment of interventions' value and imperative for generating cost-effectiveness evidence for both current and future pandemics.
| S-EPMC8986127 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDiabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is a severe complication of diabetes and particularly susceptible to infection. DFU infection intervention efficacy is declining due to antimicrobial resistance and a systematic review of economic evaluations considering their economic feasibility is timely and required.AimTo obtain and critically appraise all available full economic evaluations jointly considering costs and outcomes of infected DFUs.MethodsA literature search was conducted across MedLine, CINAHL, Scopus and Cochrane Database seeking evaluations published from inception to 2019 using specific key concepts. Eligibility criteria were defined to guide study selection. Articles were identified by screening of titles and abstracts, followed by a full-text review before inclusion. We identified 352 papers that report economic analysis of the costs and outcomes of interventions aimed at diabetic foot ulcer infections. Key characteristics of eligible economic evaluations were extracted, and their quality assessed against the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.Results542 records were screened and 39 full-texts assessed for eligibility. A total of 19 papers were included in the final analysis. All studies except one identified cost-saving or cost-effective interventions. The evaluations included in the final analysis were so heterogeneous that comparison of them was not possible. All studies were of "excellent", "very good" or "good" quality when assessed against the CHEERS checklist.ConclusionsConsistent identification of cost-effective and cost-saving interventions may help to reduce the DFU healthcare burden. Future research should involve clinical implementation of interventions with parallel economic evaluation rather than model-based evaluations.
| S-EPMC7192475 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealth economic evaluations require cost data as key inputs. Many countries do not have standardized reference costs so costs used often vary between studies, thereby reducing transparency and transferability. The present review provided a comprehensive overview of cost sources and suggested unit costs for France, Germany and Italy, to support health economic evaluations in these countries, particularly in the field of diabetes.MethodsA literature review was conducted across multiple databases to identify published unit costs and cost data sources for resource items commonly used in health economic evaluations of antidiabetic therapies. The quality of unit cost reporting was assessed with regard to comprehensiveness of cost reporting and referencing as well as accessibility of cost sources from published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) of antidiabetic medications.ResultsAn overview of cost sources, including tariff and fee schedules as well as published estimates, was developed for France, Germany and Italy, covering primary and specialist outpatient care, emergency care, hospital treatment, pharmacy costs and lost productivity. Based on these sources, unit cost datasets were suggested for each country. The assessment of unit cost reporting showed that only 60% and 40% of CEAs reported unit costs and referenced them for all pharmacy items, respectively. Less than 20% of CEAs obtained all pharmacy costs from publicly available sources.ConclusionsThis review provides a comprehensive account of available costs and cost sources in France, Germany and Italy to support health economists and increase transparency in health economic evaluations in diabetes.
| S-EPMC7561572 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Productivity costs can strongly impact cost-effectiveness outcomes. This study investigated the impact in the context of expensive hospital drugs. This study aimed to: (1) investigate the effect of productivity costs on cost-effectiveness outcomes, (2) determine whether economic evaluations of expensive drugs commonly include productivity costs related to paid and unpaid work, and (3) explore potential reasons for excluding productivity costs from the economic evaluation. We conducted a systematic literature review to identify economic evaluations of 33 expensive drugs. We analysed whether evaluations included productivity costs and whether inclusion or exclusion was related to the study population's age, health and national health economic guidelines. The impact on cost-effectiveness outcomes was assessed in studies that included productivity costs. Of 249 identified economic evaluations of expensive drugs, 22 (9 %) included productivity costs related to paid work. One study included unpaid productivity. Mostly, productivity cost exclusion could not be explained by the study population's age and health status, but national guidelines appeared influential. Productivity costs proved often highly influential. This study indicates that productivity costs in economic evaluations of expensive hospital drugs are commonly and inconsistently ignored in economic evaluations. This warrants caution in interpreting and comparing the results of these evaluations.
| S-EPMC4837201 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background/objectiveSexually transmitted infections (STIs) not only have an impact on the health sector but also the private resources of those affected, their families and other sectors of society (i.e. labour, education). This study aimed to i) review and identify economic evaluations of interventions relating to STIs, which aimed to include a societal perspective; ii) analyse the intersectoral costs (i.e. costs broader than healthcare) included; iii) categorise these costs by sector; and iv) assess the impact of intersectoral costs on the overall study results.MethodsSeven databases were searched: MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit and NHS EED. Key search terms included terms for economic evaluation, STIs and specific infections. This review considered trial- and model-based economic evaluations conducted in an OECD member country. Studies were included that assessed intersectoral costs. Intersectoral costs were extracted and categorised by sector using Drummond's cost classification scheme (i.e. patient/family, productivity, costs in other sectors). A narrative synthesis was performed.ResultsTwenty-nine studies qualified for data extraction and narrative synthesis. Twenty-eight studies applied a societal perspective of which 8 additionally adopted a healthcare or payer perspective, or both. One study used a modified payer perspective. The following sectors were identified: patient/family, informal care, paid labour (productivity), non-paid opportunity costs, education, and consumption. Patient/family costs were captured in 11 studies and included patient time, travel expenses, out-of-pocket costs and premature burial costs. Informal caregiver support (non-family) and unpaid help by family/friends was captured in three studies. Paid labour losses were assessed in all but three studies. Three studies also captured the costs and inability to perform non-paid work. Educational costs and future non-health consumption costs were each captured in one study. The inclusion of intersectoral costs resulted in more favourable cost estimates.ConclusionsThis systematic review suggests that economic evaluations of interventions relating to STIs that adopt a societal perspective tend to be limited in scope. There is an urgent need for economic evaluations to be more comprehensive in order to allow policy/decision-makers to make better-informed decisions.
| S-EPMC9701033 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOver a quarter of people have an anxiety disorder at some point in their life, with many first experiencing difficulties during childhood or adolescence. Despite this, gaps still exist in the current evidence base of the multiple consequences of childhood anxiety problems and their costs.MethodsA systematic review of Medline, PsycINFO, EconLit and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database was conducted for longitudinal and economic studies reporting on the association between childhood anxiety problems and at least one individual-, family- or societal-level outcome or cost. All studies were synthesised narratively. For longitudinal studies, 'effect direction' was used as a common metric, with random effects meta-analysis undertaken where possible.ResultsEighty-three studies met inclusion criteria and were synthesised narratively. We identified 788 separate analyses from the longitudinal studies, which we grouped into 15 overarching outcome domains. Thirteen of the studies were incorporated into 13 meta-analyses, which indicated that childhood anxiety disorders were associated with future anxiety, mood, behaviour and substance disorders. Narrative synthesis also suggested associations between anxiety problems and worse physical health, behaviour, self-harm, eating, relationship, educational, health care, employment, and financial outcomes. 'Effect direction' was conflicting in some domains due to a sparse evidence base. Higher economic costs were identified for the child, their families, healthcare providers and wider society, although evidence was limited and only covered short follow-up periods, up to a maximum of 2 years. Total annual societal costs per anxious child were up to £4040 (2021 GBP).ConclusionsChildhood anxiety problems are associated with impaired outcomes in numerous domains, and considerable economic costs, which highlight the need for cost-effective interventions and policies to tackle them. More economic evidence is needed to inform models of the long-term, economic-related, consequences of childhood anxiety problems.
| S-EPMC10501703 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundeHealth applications are constantly increasing and are frequently considered to constitute a promising strategy for cost containment in health care, particularly if the applications aim to support older persons. Older persons are, however, not the only major eHealth stakeholder. eHealth suppliers, caregivers, funding bodies, and health authorities are also likely to attribute value to eHealth applications, but they can differ in their value attribution because they are affected differently by eHealth costs and benefits. Therefore, any assessment of the value of eHealth applications requires the consideration of multiple stakeholders in a holistic and integrated manner. Such a holistic and reliable value assessment requires a profound understanding of the application's costs and benefits. The first step in measuring costs and benefits is identifying the relevant costs and benefit categories that the eHealth application affects.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to support the conceptual phase of an economic evaluation by providing an overview of the relevant direct and indirect costs and benefits incorporated in economic evaluations so far.MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature search covering papers published until December 2019 by using the Embase, Medline Ovid, Web of Science, and CINAHL EBSCOhost databases. We included papers on eHealth applications with web-based contact possibilities between clients and health care providers (mobile health apps) and applications for self-management, telehomecare, telemedicine, telemonitoring, telerehabilitation, and active healthy aging technologies for older persons. We included studies that focused on any type of economic evaluation, including costs and benefit measures.ResultsWe identified 55 papers with economic evaluations. These studies considered a range of different types of costs and benefits. Costs pertained to implementation activities and operational activities related to eHealth applications. Benefits (or consequences) could be categorized according to stakeholder groups, that is, older persons, caregivers, and health care providers. These benefits can further be divided into stakeholder-specific outcomes and resource usage. Some cost and benefit types have received more attention than others. For instance, patient outcomes have been predominantly captured via quality-of-life considerations and various types of physical health status indicators. From the perspective of resource usage, a strong emphasis has been placed on home care visits and hospital usage.ConclusionsEconomic evaluations of eHealth applications are gaining momentum, and studies have shown considerable variation regarding the costs and benefits that they include. We contribute to the body of literature by providing a detailed and up-to-date framework of cost and benefit categories that any interested stakeholder can use as a starting point to conduct an economic evaluation in the context of independent living of older persons.
| S-EPMC7988395 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a rare and aggressive subtype of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. While treatment of patients with MCL and their outcomes are previously published, the availability of heath economics evidence is unclear.ObjectiveThe aim of this paper was to conduct a comprehensive review of studies relating to economic evaluations, costs and resource use, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with MCL.MethodsSearch strategies were designed to capture studies reporting economic or HRQoL outcomes published in the previous 11 years (2007-2018). The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, Embase, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), and EconLit. In addition, we reviewed congress abstracts presented over the previous 2 years (2015 and 2016; where 2017 proceedings had occurred, these were searched instead of 2015). Publications were screened in duplicate by two reviewers and supplementary searches were carried out on health technology assessment websites. Searches were first conducted in October 2017 and updated in March 2018.FindingsThe systematic literature review identified 11 economic evaluations (in 16 publications), seven studies reporting data relating to costs or resource use, and five relating to HRQoL. Four economic evaluations presented results for patients with MCL modelled in the first-line setting, while seven modelled patients in the relapsed/refractory setting. The majority of economic evaluations were conducted using a Markov model with three to five health states. Seven studies assessed resource use and reported adverse events as key drivers of increased costs and resource use. Across the five studies reporting HRQoL, disparate measures were used. Two studies reported improvement in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) total scores following treatment and found that clinical response to treatment was associated with improvement in overall HRQoL.Conclusions and relevanceThe published economic and HRQoL evidence in MCL, although scarce, reveals that the economic and HRQoL burden associated with MCL is substantial. In highlighting this evidence, this analysis underlines a critical unmet need for more effective treatments with improved outcomes in MCL.
| S-EPMC8160060 | biostudies-literature