Measuring costs and consequences in economic evaluation in asthma

The Concept of Economic Evaluation and Its Application in Thyroid Cancer Research

Economic evaluation is a type of comparative analysis between interventions in terms of both their resource use and health outcomes. Due to the good prognosis of thyroid cancer (TC), the socioeconomic burden of TC patients post-diagnosis is increasing. Therefore, economic evaluation studies focusing on TC are recommended. This study aimed to describe the concept and methods of economic evaluation and reviewed previous TC studies. Several previous studies compared the costs of interventions or evaluated recurrence, complications, or quality of life as measures of their effectiveness. Regarding costs, most studies focused on direct costs and applied hypothetical models. Cost-minimization analysis should be distinguished from simple cost analysis. Furthermore, due to the universality of the term "cost-effectiveness analysis" (CEA), several studies have not distinguished CEA from cost-utility analysis; this point needs to be considered in future research. Cost-benefit analyses have not been conducted in previous TC research. Since TC has a high survival rate and good prognosis, the need for economic evaluations has recently been pointed out. Therefore, correct concepts and methods are needed to obtain clear economic evaluation results. On this basis, it will be possible to provide appropriate guidelines for TC treatment and management in the future.

Economic burden of childhood asthma in children attending a follow-up clinic in a resource-poor setting of Southeast Nigeria

BACKGROUND

Beyond its chronicity, childhood asthma carries an economic burden for households. In this study we evaluated the cost of care of childhood asthma in a Nigerian household.

METHODS

A cross-sectional hospital-based study. Relevant information was obtained through an interviewer-administered questionnaire. The cost of asthma treatment was estimated using direct medical costs and loss in productivity. Data analysis was done with SPSS version 22. A significant value of p < 0.05 was used.

RESULTS

Sixty-six participants were enrolled, mean ± SD age (11.6 ± ) the average direct cost was USD10.35. The cost of drug was USD5.8 and accounted for 56% of the direct cost. The loss in productivity was USD16.73. The mean cost per clinic visit was USD27.08, which was catastrophic in 12 (18.2%) households. The calculated annual cost of asthma treatment was USD162.49, with a cumulative national cost of USD 0.16 billion, which makes up 0.002% of the national GDP.

CONCLUSION

The cost burden of asthma treatment may be low on the households but carries a huge national cost impact. We recommend the inclusion of asthma care in the Nigerian social health insurance as this may help reduce the financial burden due to asthma.

Accreditation of specialized asthma units for adults in Spain: an applicable experience for the management of difficult-to-control asthma

This paper, developed by consensus of staff physicians of accredited asthma units for the management of severe asthma, presents information on the process and requirements for already-existing asthma units to achieve official accreditation by the Spanish Society of Pneumology and Thoracic Surgery (SEPAR). Three levels of specialized asthma care have been established based on available resources, which include specialized units for highly complex asthma, specialized asthma units, and basic asthma units. Regardless of the level of accreditation obtained, the distinction of “excellence” could be granted when more requirements in the areas of provision of care, technical and human resources, training in asthma, and teaching and research activities were met at each level. The Spanish experience in the process of accreditation of specialized asthma units, particularly for the care of patients with difficult-to-control asthma, may be applicable to other health care settings.

How to Measure Costs and Benefits of eHealth Interventions: An Overview of Methods and Frameworks

Information on the costs and benefits of eHealth interventions is needed, not only to document value for money and to support decision making in the field, but also to form the basis for developing business models and to facilitate payment systems to support large-scale services. In the absence of solid evidence of its effects, key decision makers may doubt the effectiveness, which, in turn, limits investment in, and the long-term integration of, eHealth services. However, it is not realistic to conduct economic evaluations of all eHealth applications and services in all situations, so we need to be able to generalize from those we do conduct. This implies that we have to select the most appropriate methodology and data collection strategy in order to increase the transferability across evaluations. This paper aims to contribute to the understanding of how to apply economic evaluation methodology in the eHealth field. It provides a brief overview of basic health economics principles and frameworks and discusses some methodological issues and challenges in conducting cost-effectiveness analysis of eHealth interventions. Issues regarding the identification, measurement, and valuation of costs and benefits are outlined. Furthermore, this work describes the established techniques of combining costs and benefits, presents the decision rules for identifying the preferred option, and outlines approaches to data collection strategies. Issues related to transferability and complexity are also discussed.

Mapping asthma-associated variants in admixed populations

Admixed populations arise when two or more previously isolated populations interbreed. Mapping asthma susceptibility loci in an admixed population using admixture mapping (AM) involves screening the genome of individuals of mixed ancestry for chromosomal regions that have a higher frequency of alleles from a parental population with higher asthma risk as compared with parental population with lower asthma risk. AM takes advantage of the admixture created in populations of mixed ancestry to identify genomic regions where an association exists between genetic ancestry and asthma (in contrast to between the genotype of the marker and asthma). The theory behind AM is that chromosomal segments of affected individuals contain a significantly higher-than-average proportion of alleles from the high-risk parental population and thus are more likely to harbor disease-associated loci. Criteria to evaluate the applicability of AM as a gene mapping approach include: (1) the prevalence of the disease differences in ancestral populations from which the admixed population was formed; (2) a measurable difference in disease-causing alleles between the parental populations; (3) reduced linkage disequilibrium (LD) between unlinked loci across chromosomes and strong LD between neighboring loci; (4) a set of markers with noticeable allele-frequency differences between parental populations that contributes to the admixed population (single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are the markers of choice because they are abundant, stable, relatively cheap to genotype, and informative with regard to the LD structure of chromosomal segments); and (5) there is an understanding of the extent of segmental chromosomal admixtures and their interactions with environmental factors. Although genome-wide association studies have contributed greatly to our understanding of the genetic components of asthma, the large and increasing degree of admixture in populations across the world create many challenges for further efforts to map disease-causing genes. This review, summarizes the historical context of admixed populations and AM, and considers current opportunities to use AM to map asthma genes. In addition, we provide an overview of the potential limitations and future directions of AM in biomedical research, including joint admixture and association mapping for asthma and asthma-related disorders.

Better informing decision making with multiple outcomes cost-effectiveness analysis under uncertainty in cost-disutility space

INTRODUCTION

Comparing multiple, diverse outcomes with cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is important, yet challenging in areas like palliative care where domains are unamenable to integration with survival. Generic multi-attribute utility values exclude important domains and non-health outcomes, while partial analyses-where outcomes are considered separately, with their joint relationship under uncertainty ignored-lead to incorrect inference regarding preferred strategies.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this paper is to consider whether such decision making can be better informed with alternative presentation and summary measures, extending methods previously shown to have advantages in multiple strategy comparison.

METHODS

Multiple outcomes CEA of a home-based palliative care model (PEACH) relative to usual care is undertaken in cost disutility (CDU) space and compared with analysis on the cost-effectiveness plane. Summary measures developed for comparing strategies across potential threshold values for multiple outcomes include: expected net loss (ENL) planes quantifying differences in expected net benefit; the ENL contour identifying preferred strategies minimising ENL and their expected value of perfect information; and cost-effectiveness acceptability planes showing probability of strategies minimising ENL.

RESULTS

Conventional analysis suggests PEACH is cost-effective when the threshold value per additional day at home (𝕜1) exceeds $1,068 or dominated by usual care when only the proportion of home deaths is considered. In contrast, neither alternative dominate in CDU space where cost and outcomes are jointly considered, with the optimal strategy depending on threshold values. For example, PEACH minimises ENL when 𝕜1=$2,000 and 𝕜2=$2,000 (threshold value for dying at home), with a 51.6% chance of PEACH being cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

Comparison in CDU space and associated summary measures have distinct advantages to multiple domain comparisons, aiding transparent and robust joint comparison of costs and multiple effects under uncertainty across potential threshold values for effect, better informing net benefit assessment and related reimbursement and research decisions.

Using QALYs in telehealth evaluations: a systematic review of methodology and transparency

Background

The quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) is a recognised outcome measure in health economic evaluations. QALY incorporates individual preferences and identifies health gains by combining mortality and morbidity into one single index number. A literature review was conducted to examine and discuss the use of QALYs to measure outcomes in telehealth evaluations.

Methods

Evaluations were identified via a literature search in all relevant databases. Only economic evaluations measuring both costs and QALYs using primary patient level data of two or more alternatives were included.

Results

A total of 17 economic evaluations estimating QALYs were identified. All evaluations used validated generic health related-quality of life (HRQoL) instruments to describe health states. They used accepted methods for transforming the quality scores into utility values. The methodology used varied between the evaluations. The evaluations used four different preference measures (EQ-5D, SF-6D, QWB and HUI3), and utility scores were elicited from the general population. Most studies reported the methodology used in calculating QALYs. The evaluations were less transparent in reporting utility weights at different time points and variability around utilities and QALYs. Few made adjustments for differences in baseline utilities. The QALYs gained in the reviewed evaluations varied from 0.001 to 0.118 in implying a small but positive effect of telehealth intervention on patient’s health. The evaluations reported mixed cost-effectiveness results.

Conclusion

The use of QALYs in telehealth evaluations has increased over the last few years. Different methodologies and utility measures have been used to calculate QALYs. A more harmonised methodology and utility measure is needed to ensure comparability across telehealth evaluations.

Modeling asthma exacerbations through lung function in children

BACKGROUND

Formal economic evaluation using a model-based approach is playing an increasingly important role in health care decision making.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a model by using an objective measure of lung function-- prebronchodilator FEV(1) as a percent of predicted (FEV(1)% predicted)--as the primary independent factor to predict the frequency of adverse events related to the exacerbation of asthma on a population level.

METHODS

We developed a Markov simulation model of childhood asthma by using data from the Childhood Asthma Management Program. The primary outcomes were the result of asthma exacerbations defined as hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, and the need for oral corticosteroid therapy. Predicted monthly frequencies for each acute event were based on negative binomial regression equations estimated from the placebo arm of the Childhood Asthma Management Program with covariates of age, prebronchodilator FEV(1)% predicted, time in study, prior hospitalizations, and prior nocturnal awakenings.

RESULTS

Simulated versus observed mean number of acute events were similar within the placebo and treatment groups. While the trial demonstrated treatment effects of 48% reduction in hospitalizations, 46% reduction in ED visits, and 44% reduction in the need for oral corticosteroid therapy at 48 months, the model simulated similar reductions of 49% in hospitalizations, 41% in ED visits, and 46% in the need for oral corticosteroid therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that longitudinal intervention effects may be modeled through FEV(1)% predicted to estimate hospitalizations, ED visits, and need for oral corticosteroid therapy in childhood asthma for planning and evaluation purposes.

Asthma outcomes: healthcare utilization and costs

BACKGROUND

Measures of healthcare utilization and indirect impact of asthma morbidity are used to assess clinical interventions and estimate cost.

OBJECTIVE

National Institutes of Health institutes and other federal agencies convened an expert group to propose standardized measurement, collection, analysis, and reporting of healthcare utilization and cost outcomes in future asthma studies.

METHODS

We used comprehensive literature reviews and expert opinion to compile a list of asthma healthcare utilization outcomes that we classified as core (required in future studies), supplemental (used according to study aims and standardized), and emerging (requiring validation and standardization). We also have identified methodology to assign cost to these outcomes. This work was discussed at an National Institutes of Health-organized workshop in March 2010 and finalized in September 2011.

RESULTS

We identified 3 ways to promote comparability across clinical trials for measures of healthcare utilization, resource use, and cost: (1) specify the study perspective (patient, clinician, payer, and society); (2) standardize the measurement period (ideally 12 months); and (3) use standard units to measure healthcare utilization and other asthma-related events.

CONCLUSIONS

Large clinical trials and observational studies should collect and report detailed information on healthcare utilization, intervention resources, and indirect impact of asthma, so that costs can be calculated and cost-effectiveness analyses can be conducted across several studies. Additional research is needed to develop standard, validated survey instruments for collection of provider-reported and participant-reported data regarding asthma-related health care.

Structuring and validating a cost-effectiveness model of primary asthma prevention amongst children

BACKGROUND

Given the rising number of asthma cases and the increasing costs of health care, prevention may be the best cure. Decisions regarding the implementation of prevention programmes in general and choosing between unifaceted and multifaceted strategies in particular are urgently needed. Existing trials on the primary prevention of asthma are, however, insufficient on their own to inform the decision of stakeholders regarding the cost-effectiveness of such prevention strategies. Decision analytic modelling synthesises available data for the cost-effectiveness evaluation of strategies in an explicit manner. Published reports on model development should provide the detail and transparency required to increase the acceptability of cost-effectiveness modelling. But, detail on the explicit steps and the involvement of experts in structuring a model is often unevenly reported. In this paper, we describe a procedure to structure and validate a model for the primary prevention of asthma in children.

METHODS

An expert panel was convened for round-table discussions to frame the cost-effectiveness research question and to select and structure a model. The model's structural validity, which indicates how well a model reflects the reality, was determined through descriptive and parallel validation. Descriptive validation was performed with the experts. Parallel validation qualitatively compared similarity between other published models with different decision problems.

RESULTS

The multidisciplinary input of experts helped to develop a decision-tree structure which compares the current situation with screening and prevention. The prevention was further divided between multifaceted and unifaceted approaches to analyse the differences. The clinical outcome was diagnosis of asthma. No similar model was found in the literature discussing the same decision problem. Structural validity in terms of descriptive validity was achieved with the experts and was supported by parallel validation.

CONCLUSIONS

A decision-tree model developed with experts in round-table discussions benefits from a systematic and transparent approach and the multidisciplinary contributions of the experts. Parallel validation provides a feasible alternative to validating novel models. The process of structuring and validating a model presented in this paper could be a useful guide to increase transparency, credibility, and acceptability of (future, novel) models when experts are involved.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of corticosteroid inhaler devices in primary care asthma management: A real world observational study

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare real world cost-effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) administered by metered dose inhaler (MDI), breath-actuated MDI (BAI), or dry powder inhaler (DPI) in asthma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective database study analyzed the direct health care costs and proportion of patients (aged 5-60 years) achieving asthma control over 1 year in two population groups: those starting ICS (initiation population) and those receiving a first increase in ICS dose (step-up population). Asthma control was defined as no unplanned asthma visits, oral corticosteroids, or antibiotics for lower respiratory infection; outcomes were adjusted for confounding variables. Cost-effectiveness of BAI and DPI were compared with MDI.

RESULTS

For the initiation population (n = 56,347), average annual health care costs per person (adjusted results), as compared with MDIs, were £9 higher (95% CI: -1.65 to 19.71) for BAIs and £32 higher (95% CI: 19.51 to 43.66) for DPIs. The probability of BAIs being the dominant strategy (more effective and less costly than MDIs) was 5% and of BAIs being more effective and more costly than MDIs was 94%. DPIs were consistently more effective and more costly than MDIs, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £1711 (95% CI: 760 to 3,576) per additional controlled patient per year. For the step-up population (n = 9169), mean total health care costs per person, (adjusted) as compared with MDIs, were £1 higher (95% CI: -27.28 to 31.55) for BAIs and £73 higher (95% CI: 44.48 to 103.29) for DPIs. The probability of BAIs being dominant was 48% and of BAIs being more effective but more costly than MDIs was 52%; the probability of DPIs being more effective but more costly than MDIs was 96%.

CONCLUSION

The real world effectiveness of ICS inhalers may vary, and inhaler device selection for patients with asthma should take into consideration not only initial device cost but also the subsequent health care resource costs.

Economic evaluation in telemedicine - still room for improvement

It has been reported that economic evaluations of telemedicine are less adherent to methodological standards than economic evaluations in other fields. Systematic reviews also show that most studies evaluate benefits in terms of the cost savings, with no assessment of the health benefits for patients. In a recent review of economic evaluations, I found 33 articles that measured both costs and non-resource consequences of using telemedicine in direct patient care. This represents a considerable increase compared to previous reviews. The articles analysed were highly diverse in both study context and applied methods. Most studies used multiple outcome measures, such as diagnostic accuracy, blood glucose levels, wound size or quality-adjusted life-years gained. The effectiveness measures appeared more consistent and well reported than the costings. Objectives, study design and choice of comparators were mostly well reported. However, most studies lacked information on perspective and costing method, few used general statistics and sensitivity analysis to assess validity, and even fewer used marginal analysis. These shortcomings in economic evaluation methodology are relatively common and have been found in other fields of research.

Can economic evaluation in telemedicine be trusted? A systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Telemedicine has been advocated as an effective means to provide health care services over a distance. Systematic information on costs and consequences has been called for to support decision-making in this field. This paper provides a review of the quality, validity and generalisability of economic evaluations in telemedicine.

METHODS

A systematic literature search in all relevant databases was conducted and forms the basis for addressing these issues. Only articles published in peer-reviewed journals and written in English in the period from 1990 to 2007 were analysed. The literature search identified 33 economic evaluations where both costs (resource use) and outcomes (non-resource consequences) were measured.

RESULTS

This review shows that economic evaluations in telemedicine are highly diverse in terms of both the study context and the methods applied. The articles covered several medical specialities ranging from cardiology and dermatology to psychiatry. The studies analysed telemedicine in home care, and in primary and secondary care settings using a variety of different technologies including videoconferencing, still-images and monitoring (store-and-forward telemedicine). Most studies used multiple outcome measures and analysed the effects using disaggregated cost-consequence frameworks. Objectives, study design, and choice of comparators were mostly well reported. The majority of the studies lacked information on perspective and costing method, few used general statistics and sensitivity analysis to assess validity, and even fewer used marginal analysis.

CONCLUSION

As this paper demonstrates, the majority of the economic evaluations reviewed were not in accordance with standard evaluation techniques. Further research is needed to explore the reasons for this and to address how economic evaluation in telemedicine best can take advantage of local constraints and at the same time produce valid and generalisable results.

Health economics of asthma: assessing the value of asthma interventions

The aim of this systematic review was to summarize and assess the quality of asthma intervention health economic studies from 2002 to 2007, compare the study findings with clinical management guidelines, and suggest avenues for future improvement of asthma health economic studies. Forty of the 177 studies met our inclusion criteria. We assessed the quality of studies using The Quality of Health Economic Studies validated instrument (total score range: 0-100). Six studies (15%) had quality category 2, 26 studies (65%) achieved quality category 3, and the remaining eight (20%) studies were scored as the highest quality level, category 4. Overall, the findings from this review are in line with the Global Initiative for Asthma clinical guidelines. Many asthma health economic studies lacked appropriate long term time horizons to match the chronic nature of the disease and suffered from using effectiveness measures that did not capture all disease related risks and benefits. We recommend that new asthma simulation models: be flexible to allow for long term time horizons, focus on using levels of asthma control in their structure, and estimate both long term asthma specific outcomes like well-controlled time as well as generic outcomes such as quality adjusted survival.

Probabilistic Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of bronchodilator therapy in COPD patients in different countries

OBJECTIVES

The development of a probabilistic Markov model with a time horizon of 1 year to compare the cost-effectiveness of three bronchodilators: 1) the new long-acting anticholinergic tiotropium; 2) the short-acting anticholinergic ipratropium; and 3) the long-acting beta 2-agonist salmeterol, for the treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in different countries. In this article we compare The Netherlands and Canada.

METHODS

The Markov model was structured along disease severity states and exacerbations. Transition probabilities between disease states and exacerbation probabilities were derived from patient-level data from six randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy and safety of tiotropium. Resource utilization during exacerbations and maintenance treatment for The Netherlands were derived from two clinical trials, whereas for Canada these data were obtained from a countrywide observational study that used similar inclusion criteria as the trials. Second-order Monte Carlo simulations were undertaken in which values were randomly drawn from distributions of these parameters. Outcomes of the model are yearly treatment costs, exacerbations, and quality-adjusted life months.

RESULTS

The mean difference in the number of exacerbations was 0.17 (95% uncertainty interval: -0.02-0.37) in favor of tiotropium when compared with salmeterol and the difference between salmeterol and ipratropium was 0.12 (-0.17-0.44) in favor of salmeterol. The number of quality-adjusted life months did not substantially differ between treatment groups and varied from 8.42 (SE 0.41) in the tiotropium group to 8.17 (0.46) in the salmeterol group and 8.11 (0.50) in the ipratropium group. In The Netherlands, costs in the tiotropium group were 42 Euros (-484-353) lower than in the salmeterol group, whereas costs in the salmeterol group were 128 Euros (-795-457) lower than in the ipratropium group. In Canada, costs were consistently lower than in The Netherlands and nearly the same in all treatment groups. Differences between the two countries were primarily a result of a higher length of hospital stay in case of an exacerbation in The Netherlands. The cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier of exacerbations showed that tiotropium was associated with the maximum expected net benefit for all values of the ceiling ratio above 0 Euros (The Netherlands) and 10 Euros (Canada) in the base case analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This probabilistic model-based economic evaluation demonstrates how clinical trial data can be combined and integrated with country-specific information about resource utilization and unit cost to assess the cost-effectiveness of bronchodilators in COPD patients. Quality-adjusted life months did not substantially differ between treatment groups. In terms of exacerbations, tiotropium was associated with maximum expected net benefit for plausible values of the ceiling ratio. In sensitivity analyses, this outcome was most sensitive to changes in exacerbation rates.