Cost-effectiveness analysis of humanitarian relief interventions: visceral leishmaniasis treatment in the Sudan

Spending by aid agencies on emergencies has quadrupled over the last decade, to over US$ 6 billion. To date, cost-effectiveness has seldom been considered in the prioritization and evaluation of emergency interventions. The sheer volume of resources spent on humanitarian aid and the chronicity of many humanitarian interventions call for more attention to be paid to the issue of 'value for money'. In this paper we present data from a major humanitarian crisis, an epidemic of visceral leishmaniasis (VL) in war-torn Sudan. The special circumstances provided us, in retrospect, with unusually accurate data on excess mortality, costs of the intervention and its effects, thus allowing us to express cost-effectiveness as the cost per Disability Adjusted Life Year (DALY) averted. The cost-effectiveness ratio, of US$ 18.40 per DALY (uncertainty range between US$ 13.53 and US$ 27.63), places the treatment of VL in Sudan among health interventions considered 'very flood value for money' (interventions of less than US$ 25 per DALY). We discuss the usefulness of this analysis to the internal management of the VL programme, the procurement of funds for the programme, and more generally, to priority setting in humanitarian relief interventions. We feel that in evaluations of emergency interventions attempts could be made more often to perform cost-effectiveness analyses, including the use of DALYs, provided that the outcomes of these analyses are seen in the broad context of the emergency situation and its consequences on the affected population. This paper provides a first contribution to what is hoped to become an international database of cost-effectiveness studies of health outcome such as the DALY.

Life-cycle preferences over consumption and health: when is cost-effectiveness analysis equivalent to cost-benefit analysis?

This paper studies life-cycle preferences over consumption and health status. We show that cost-effectiveness analysis is consistent with cost-benefit analysis if the Lifetime utility function is additive over time, multiplicative in the utility of consumption and the utility of health status, and if the utility of consumption is constant over time. We derive the conditions under which the lifetime utility function takes this form, both under expected utility theory and under rank-dependent utility theory, which is currently the most important nonexpected utility theory. If cost-effectiveness analysis is consistent with cost-benefit analysis, it is possible to derive tractable expressions for the willingness to pay for quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The willingness to pay for QALYs depends on wealth, remaining life expectancy, health status, and the possibilities for intertemporal substitution of consumption. (C) 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Achieving the millennium development goals for health - Cost effectiveness analysis of strategies for. maternal and neonatal health in developing countries

Objective To determine the costs and benefits of interventions for maternal and newborn health to assess the appropriateness of current strategies and guide future plans to attain the millennium development goals. Design Cost effectiveness analysis. Setting Two regions classified by the World Health Organization according to their epidemiological grouping: Afr-E, those countries in sub-Saharan Africa with very high adult and high child mortality, and Sear-D, comprising countries in South East Asia with high adult and high child mortality. Data sources Effectiveness data from several sources, including trials, observational studies, and expert opinion. For resource inputs, quantifies came from WHO guidelines, literature, and expert opinion, and prices from the WHO choosing interventions that are cost effective database. Main outcome measures Cost per disability adjusted life year (DALY) averted in year 2000 international dollars. Results The most cost effective mix of interventions was similar in Afr-E and Sear-D. These were the community based newborn care package, followed by antenatal care (tetanus toxoid, screening for pre-eclampsia, screening and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria and syphilis); skilled attendance at birth, offering first level maternal and neonatal care around childbirth; and emergency obstetric and neonatal care around and after birth. Screening and treatment of maternal syphilis, community based management of neonatal pneumonia, and steroids given during the antenatal period were relatively less cost effective in Sear-D. Scaling up all of the included interventions to 95% coverage would halve neonatal and maternal deaths. Conclusion Preventive interventions at the community level for newborn babies and at the primary care level for mothers and newborn babies are extremely cost effective, but the millennium development goals for maternal and child health will not be achieved without universal access to clinical services as well.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of buprenorphine-assisted heroin withdrawal

The purpose of this study was to conduct a cost - effectiveness analysis of detoxification from heroin using buprenorphine in a specialist clinic versus a shared care setting. A randomized controlled trial was conducted with a total of 115 heroin-dependent patients receiving a 5-day treatment regime of buprenorphine. The specialist clinic was a community-based treatment agency in inner-city Sydney. Shared care involved treatment by a general practitioner supplemented by weekend dispensing and some concurrent counselling at the specialist clinic. Quanti. cation of resource use was limited to inputs for treatment provision. The primary outcome measure used in the economic analysis was the proportion of each group that completed detoxification and achieved an initial 7-day period of abstinence. Buprenorphine detoxification in the shared care setting was estimated to be $24 more expensive per patient than treatment at the clinic, which had an average treatment cost of $332 per patient. Twenty-three per cent of the shared care patients and 22% of the clinic patients reported no opiate use during the withdrawal period. These results suggest that the provision of buprenorphine treatment for heroin dependence in shared care and clinic appear to be equally cost - effective.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of two rehabilitation support services for women with breast cancer

The purpose of this research was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of two rehabilitation interventions for breast cancer survivors, each compared to a population-based, non-intervention group (n = 208). The two services included an early home-based physiotherapy intervention (DAART, n = 36) and a group-based exercise and psychosocial intervention (STRETCH, n = 31). A societal perspective was taken and costs were included as those incurred by the health care system, the survivors and community. Health outcomes included: (a) 'rehabilitated cases' based on changes in health-related quality of life between 6 and 12 months post-diagnosis, using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast Cancer plus Arm Morbidity (FACT-B+4) questionnaire, and (b) quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) using utility scores from the Subjective Health Estimation (SHE) scale. Data were collected using self-reported questionnaires, medical records and program budgets. A Monte-Carlo modelling approach was used to test for uncertainty in cost and outcome estimates. The proportion of rehabilitated cases was similar across the three groups. From a societal perspective compared with the non-intervention group, the DAART intervention appeared to be the most efficient option with an incremental cost of $1344 per QALY gained, whereas the incremental cost per QALY gained from the STRETCH program was $14,478. Both DAART and STRETCH are low-cost, low-technological health promoting programs representing excellent public health investments.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of fluvastatin in patients with diabetes after successful percutaneous coronary intervention

Background: The Lescol Intervention Prevention Study (LIPS) was a multinational randomized controlled trial that showed a 47% reduction in the relative risk of cardiac death and a 22% reduction in major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) from the routine use of fluvastatin, compared with controls, in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI, defined as angioplasty with or without stents). In this study, MACEs included cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and subsequent PCI and coronary artery bypass graft. Diabetes was the greatest risk factor for MACEs. Objective: This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of fluvastatin when used for secondary prevention of MACEs after PCI in people with diabetes. Methods: A post hoc subgroup analysis of patients with diabetes from the LIPS was used to estimate the effectiveness of fluvastatin in reducing myocardial infarction, revascularization, and cardiac death. A probabilistic Markov model was developed using United Kingdom resource and cost data to estimate the additional costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained over 10 years from the perspective of the British National Health Service. The model contained 6 health states, and the transition probabilities were derived from the LIPS data. Crossover from fluvastatin to other lipid-lowering drugs, withdrawal from fluvastatin, and the use of lipid-lowering drugs in the control group were included. Results: In the subgroup of 202 patients with diabetes in the LIPS trial, 18 (15.0%) of 120 fluvastatin patients and 21 (25.6%) of 82 control participants were insulin dependent (P = NS). Compared with the control group, patients treated with fluvastatin can expect to gain an additional mean (SD) of 0.196 (0.139) QALY per patient over 10 years (P < 0.001) and will cost the health service an additional mean (SD) of 10 (E448) (P = NS) (mean [SD] US $16 [$689]). The additional cost per QALY gained was;(51 (US $78). The key determinants of cost-effectiveness included the probabilities of repeat interventions, cardiac death, the cost of fluvastatin, and the time horizon used for the evaluation. Conclusion: Fluvastatin was an economically efficient treatment to prevent MACEs in these patients with diabetes undergoing PCI.

Does pharmacogenomics provide an ethical challenge to the utilisation of cost-effectiveness analysis by public health systems?

Pharmacogenomics promotes an understanding of the genetic basis for differences in efficacy or toxicity of drugs in different individuals. Implementation of the outcomes of pharmacogenomic research into clinical practice presents a number of difficulties for healthcare. This paper aims to highlight one of the Unique ethical challenges which pharmacogenomics presents for the utilisation of cost-effectiveness analysis by public health systems. This paper contends that pharmacogenomics provides a challenge to fundamental principles which underlie most systems for deciding which drugs should be publicly subsidised. Pharmacogenomics brings into focus the conflict between equality and utility in the context of using cost-effectiveness analysis to aid distribution of a limited national drug budget.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a kidney and cardiovascular disease treatment program in an Australian aboriginal population

The objective of the study was to assess, from a health service perspective, whether a systematic program to modify kidney and cardiovascular disease reduced the costs of treating end-stage kidney failure. The participants in the study were 1,800 aboriginal adults with hypertension, diabetes with microalbuminuria or overt albuminuria, and overt albuminuria, living on two islands in the Northern Territory of Australia during 1995 to 2000. Perindopril was the primary treatment agent, and other medications were also used to control blood pressure. Control of glucose and lipid levels were attempted, and health education was offered. Evaluation of program resource use and costs for follow-up periods was done at 3 and 4.7 years. On an intention-to-treat basis, the number of dialysis starts and dialysis-years avoided were estimated by comparing the fate of the treatment group with that of historical control subjects, matched for disease severity, who were followed in the before the treatment program began. For the first three years, an estimated 11.6 person-years of dialysis were avoided, and over 4.7 years, 27.7 person-years of dialysis were avoided. The net cost of the program was $1,210 more per person per year than status quo care, and dialyses avoided gave net savings of $1.0 million at 3 years and $3.4 million at 4.6 years. The treatment program provided significant health benefit and impressive cost savings in dialysis avoided. (C) 2005 by the National Kidney Foundation, Inc.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of heroin detoxification methods in the Australian National Evaluation of Pharmacotherapies for Opioid Dependence (NEPOD)

This economic evaluation was part of the Australian National Evaluation of Pharmacotherapies for Opioid Dependence (NEPOD) project. Data from four trials of heroin detoxification methods, involving 365 participants, were pooled to enable a comprehensive comparison of the cost-effectiveness of five inpatient and outpatient detoxification methods. This study took the perspective of the treatment provider in assessing resource use and costs. Two short-term outcome measures were used-achievement of an initial 7-day period of abstinence, and entry into ongoing post-detoxification treatment. The mean costs of the various detoxification methods ranged widely, from AUD $491 (buprenorphine-based outpatient); to AUD $605 for conventional outpatient; AUD $1404 for conventional inpatient; AUD $1990 for rapid detoxification under sedation; and to AUD $2689 for anaesthesia per episode. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out using conventional outpatient detoxification as the base comparator. The buprenorphine-based outpatient detoxification method was found to be the most cost-effective method overall, and rapid opioid detoxification under sedation was the most costeffective inpatient method.

Cost effectiveness of adding magnetic resonance imaging to the usual management of suspected scaphoid fractures

Objective: To determine the cost effectiveness of a magnetic resonance imaging scan (MRI) within 5 days of injury compared with the usual management of occult scaphoid fracture. Methods: All patients with suspected scaphoid fractures in five hospitals were invited to participate in a randomised controlled trial of usual treatment with or without an MRI scan. Healthcare costs were compared, and a cost effectiveness analysis of the use of MRI in this scenario was performed. Results: Twenty eight of the 37 patients identified were randomised: 17 in the control group, 11 in the MRI group. The groups were similar at baseline and follow up in terms of number of scaphoid fractures, other injuries, pain, and function. Of the patients without fracture, the MRI group had significantly fewer days immobilised: a median of 3.0 (interquartile range 3.0-3.0) v 10.0 (7-12) in the control group (p = 0.006). The MRI group used fewer healthcare units (median 3.0, interquartile range 2.0-4.25) than the control group (5.0, 3.0-6.5) (p = 0.03 for the difference). However, the median cost of health care in the MRI group ($594.35 AUD, $551.35-667.23) was slightly higher than in the control group ($428.15, $124.40-702.65) (p = 0.19 for the difference). The mean incremental cost effectiveness ratio derived from this simulation was that MRI costs $44.37 per day saved from unnecessary immobilisation (95% confidence interval $4.29 to $101.02). An illustrative willingness to pay was calculated using a combination of the trials measure of the subjects' individual productivity losses and the average daily earnings. Conclusions: Use of MRI in the management of occult scaphoid fracture reduces the number of days of unnecessary immobilisation and use of healthcare units. Healthcare costs increased non-significantly in relation to the use of MRI in this setting. However, when productivity losses are considered, MRI may be considered cost effective, depending on the individual case.

Cost-effectiveness of screening with contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging vs X-ray mammography of women at a high familial risk of breast cancer

Contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE MRI) is the most sensitive tool for screening women who are at high familial risk of breast cancer. Our aim in this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of X-ray mammography (XRM), CE MRI or both strategies combined. In total, 649 women were enrolled in the MARIBS study and screened with both CE MRI and mammography resulting in 1881 screens and 1-7 individual annual screening events. Women aged 35-49 years at high risk of breast cancer, either because they have a strong family history of breast cancer or are tested carriers of a BRCA1, BRCA2 or TP53 mutation or are at a 50% risk of having inherited such a mutation, were recruited from 22 centres and offered annual MRI and XRM for between 2 and 7 years. Information on the number and type of further investigations was collected and specifically calculated unit costs were used to calculate the incremental cost per cancer detected. The numbers of cancer detected was 13 for mammography, 27 for CE MRI and 33 for mammography and CE MRI combined. In the subgroup of BRCA1 (BRCA2) mutation carriers or of women having a first degree relative with a mutation in BRCA1 (BRCA2) corresponding numbers were 3 (6), 12 (7) and 12 (11), respectively. For all women, the incremental cost per cancer detected with CE MRI and mammography combined was 28 pound 284 compared to mammography. When only BRCA1 or the BRCA2 groups were considered, this cost would be reduced to 11 pound 731 (CE MRI vs mammography) and 15 pound 302 (CE MRI and mammography vs mammography). Results were most sensitive to the unit cost estimate for a CE MRI screening test. Contrast-enhanced MRI might be a cost-effective screening modality for women at high risk, particularly for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 subgroups. Further work is needed to assess the impact of screening on mortality and health-related quality of life.