Economic evaluation of long-term impacts of universal newborn hearing screening

Cost-effectiveness of portable-automated ABR for universal neonatal hearing screening in India

The World Health Organization considers Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening (UNHS) essential to global public health. Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram has included newborn hearing screening in India since 2013. The program faces human, infrastructure, and equipment shortages. First-line hearing screening with improved diagnostic accuracy is needed. The Portable Automated Auditory Brainstem Responses (P-AABR) can be used in remote areas for UNHS due to its low infrastructure needs and diagnostic accuracy. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of P-AABR in UNHS. We employed an analytical model based on decision trees to assess the cost-effectiveness of Otoacoustic Emission (OAE) and P-AABR. The total cost to the health system for P-AABR, regardless of true positive cases, is INR 10,535,915, while OAE costs INR 7,256,198. P-AABR detects 262 cases, whereas OAE detects 26 cases. Portable Automated ABR costs INR 97 per case detection, while OAE costs INR 67. The final ICER was 97407.69. The P-AABR device is cost-effective, safe and feasible for UNHS Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram (RBSK) programs. Beyond reducing false referrals and parent indirect costs, it detects more hearing-impaired infants. Even in shortages of skilled workers, existing staff can be trained. Thus, this study suggests integrating this device into community and primary health centers to expand UNHS coverage.

Economic evaluation of newborn deafness gene screening as a public health intervention in China: a modelling study

Background

While global newborn hearing screening programmes (NHSP) are far from the optimal level, the combined hearing and genetic screening has emerged as an innovative approach of early healthcare interventions. There is a clear need for economic evaluation to establish whether newborn deafness gene screening (NDGS), currently mandated by many cities in China, is a good investment.

Methods

A decision-tree model was constructed to simulate a hypothetical 10-million Chinese newborn cohort over a lifetime with three strategies: (1) no screening, (2) NHSP (standard screening) and (3) NHSP+NDGS (combined screening). The presence of permanent congenital hearing loss (PCHL) and genetic mutation were assigned at birth and held constant for all strategies. Input parameters were obtained from the Cohort of Deafness-gene Screening study and literature review. The government contract price for genetic screening was US$77/child. Outcomes of interest included the number of early diagnosed PCHL, prelingual deafness, total deafness, special education referral, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and benefit-cost ratio (BCR).

Results

Both standard and combined screening strategies were more effective and more costly than 'no screening'. Compared with standard screening, combined screening led to 9112 (28.0%) more PCHL cases early detected, avoiding 4071 (66.9%) prelingual deafness cases and 3977 (15.6%) special education referrals. The ICER and BCR for combined screening were US$ 4995/disability-adjusted life-year (95% uncertainty interval, 2963 to 9265) and 1.78 (1.19 to 2.39), from healthcare sector perspective. Combined screening would dominate standard screening from societal perspective. Moreover, it remained cost-effective even in pessimistic scenarios.

Conclusions

Our findings have particular implication for the 'scale-up' of genetic screening at the national level in China. The model may serve as a feasible example for hearing screening strategies in other countries, as well as genetic screening for other diseases.

Cost-effectiveness of cytomegalovirus vaccination for females in China: A decision-analytical Markov study

BACKGROUND

The global burden of disease caused by congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is high. Previous modeling studies have suggested that CMV vaccination may be cost-effective in developed countries. Congenital CMV infection is more likely driven by maternal non-primary infection in China. We aimed to measure the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of population-level CMV vaccination in Chinese females.

METHODS

A decision tree Markov model was developed to simulate potential CMV vaccination strategies in a multi-cohort setting, with a population size of 1,000,000 each for the infant, adolescent (10-year-old) and young adult (20-year-old) cohorts. The hypothetical vaccines were assumed to have 50% efficacy, 20 years of protection, 70% coverage, at a price of US$120/dose for base-case analysis. Costs and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) were discounted by 3% per year and the vaccination would be considered cost-effective if an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was lower than 2021 Chinese per capita GDP (US$12,500).

FINDINGS

For the pre-infection (PRI) vaccine efficacy type, the adolescent strategy was the most cost-effective, with an ICER of US$12,213 (12,134 to 12,291) pre DALY averted, compared with the next best strategy (young adult strategy). For pre- and post-infection (P&PI) efficacy type, the young adult strategy was the most cost-effective as it was cost-saving. In one-way analysis varying the PRI vaccine price, the infant strategy, adolescent strategy and the young adult strategy would be a dominant strategy over others if the vaccine cost ≤US$60, US$61-121 and US$122-251 per dose respectively. In contrast, the young adult strategy continued to be the preferred strategy until the P&PI vaccine price exceeded US$226/dose. Our main results were robust under a wide variety of sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses.

INTERPRETATION

CMV vaccination for females would be cost-effective and even cost-saving in China. Our findings had public health implications for control of CMV diseases.

Cost-effectiveness analysis on implementing newborn hearing screening programmes in a low- to middle-income country

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the cost-effectiveness (CE) of implementing different newborn hearing screening protocols in a low- to middle-income country.

DESIGN

A decision analytical model with a 78-year time horizon.

STUDY SAMPLE

Direct medical, direct non-medical and indirect costs were collected from 126 subjects in southern Thailand. Various protocols involving universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) and targeted newborn hearing screening (TNHS), using two technologies, namely automated otoacoustic emissions (aOAEs) and automated auditory brainstem responses (aABRs), were evaluated. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for all protocols in United States dollars (US$)/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Also, probabilistic sensitivity analyses with 1000 trials for each specific protocol were performed.

RESULTS

The ICERs of UNHS with aOAE, UNHS with aABR, TNHS with aABR and UNHS with optimised baseline parameters were 3702, 3545, 1545 and 2483 US$/QALY gained, respectively. With the CE threshold of 5000 US$/QALY gained, the chances of ICERs to be cost-effective for UNHS with aOAE, UNHS with aABR, TNHS with aABR and UNHS with optimised baseline parameters were 72, 77, 93 and 94%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

All screening protocols were considered as cost-effective, and a very high chance of being cost-effective for UNHS could be achieved when certain baseline parameters were optimised.

Newborn Hearing Screening Benefits Children, but Global Disparities Persist

There is substantial evidence that newborn hearing screening (NHS) reduces the negative sequelae of permanent childhood hearing loss (PCHL) if performed in programs that aim to screen all newborns in a region or nation (often referred to as Universal Newborn Hearing Screening or UNHS). The World Health Organization (WHO) has called in two resolutions for the implementation of such programs and for the collection of large-scale data. To assess the global status of NHS programs we surveyed individuals potentially involved with newborn and infant hearing screening (NIHS) in 196 countries/territories (in the following text referred to as countries). Replies were returned from 158 countries. The results indicated that 38% of the world's newborns and infants had no or minimal hearing screening and 33% screened at least 85% of the babies (hereafter referred to as UNHS). Hearing screening programs varied considerably in quality, data acquisition, and accessibility of services for children with PCHL. In this article, we summarize the main results of the survey in the context of several recent WHO publications, particularly the World Report on Hearing, which defined advances in the implementation of NHS programs in the Member States as one of three key indicators of worldwide progress in ear and hearing care (EHC).

[Neonatal hearing screening]

Neonatal hearing screening has been developped in a large number of countries. The rational to build such nationwide programs is robust. The prevalence of hearing impairment of various etiologies is high (1/1,000), diagnosis of hearing impairment in infants is uneasy and is made most of the time after the age of 18 months when treatment is less efficient and, last, appropriate test to screen for hearing impairment are available: Otoacoustic Emission and Auditory Evoked Potential. In France the screening is organised at the regional level. The organization of such a program is complexe. Midwifes and nurses should be trained to informed the parents and to perform the test. If the test is abnormal the infant will be oriented to a specialzed department of pediatrics for appropriate diagnosis and treatment.

Evidence gaps in economic analyses of hearing healthcare: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Hearing loss is a common and costly medical condition. This systematic review sought to identify evidence gaps in published model-based economic analyses addressing hearing loss to inform model development for an ongoing Lancet Commission.

METHODS

We searched the published literature through 14 June 2020 and our inclusion criteria included decision model-based cost-effectiveness analyses that addressed diagnosis, treatment, or prevention of hearing loss. Two investigators screened articles for inclusion at the title, abstract, and full-text levels. Data were abstracted and the studies were assessed for the qualities of model structure, data assumptions, and reporting using a previously published quality scale.

FINDINGS

Of 1437 articles identified by our search, 117 unique studies met the inclusion criteria. Most of these model-based analyses were set in high-income countries (n = 96, 82%). The evaluated interventions were hearing screening (n = 35, 30%), cochlear implantation (n = 34, 29%), hearing aid use (n = 28, 24%), vaccination (n = 22, 19%), and other interventions (n = 29, 25%); some studies included multiple interventions. Eighty-six studies reported the main outcome in quality-adjusted or disability-adjusted life-years, 24 of which derived their own utility values. The majority of the studies used decision tree (n = 72, 62%) or Markov (n = 41, 35%) models. Forty-one studies (35%) incorporated indirect economic effects. The median quality rating was 92/100 (IQR:72-100).

INTERPRETATION

The review identified a large body of literature exploring the economic efficiency of hearing healthcare interventions. However, gaps in evidence remain in evaluation of hearing healthcare in low- and middle-income countries, as well as in investigating interventions across the lifespan. Additionally, considerable uncertainty remains around productivity benefits of hearing healthcare interventions as well as utility values for hearing-assisted health states. Future economic evaluations could address these limitations.

FUNDING

NCATS 3UL1-TR002553-03S3.

The Methodological Quality and Challenges in Conducting Economic Evaluations of Newborn Screening: A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

Cost-effectiveness (CEA) and cost-utility analyses (CUA) have become popular types of economic evaluations (EE) used for evidence-based decision-making in healthcare resource allocation. Newborn screening programs (NBS) can have significant clinical benefits for society, and cost-effectiveness analysis may help to select the optimal strategy among different screening programs, including the no-screening option, on different conditions. These economic analyses of NBS, however, are hindered by several methodological challenges. This study explored the methodological quality in recent NBS economic evaluations and analyzed the main challenges and strategies adopted by researchers to deal with them.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted according to PRISMA methodology to identify CEAs and CUAs of NBS. The methodological quality of the retrieved studies was assessed quantitatively using a specific guideline for the quality assessment of NBS economic evaluations, by calculating a general score for each EE. Challenges in the studies were then explored using thematic analysis as a qualitative synthesis approach.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. The quantitative analysis showed that the methodological quality of NBS economic evaluations was heterogeneous. Lack of clear description of items related to results, discussion, and discounting were the most frequent flaws. Methodological challenges in performing EEs of neonatal screenings include the adoption of a long time horizon, the use of quality-adjusted life years as health outcome measure, and the assessment of costs beyond the screening interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review can support future economic evaluation research, aiding researchers to develop a methodological guidance to perform EEs aimed at producing solid results to inform decisions for resource allocation in neonatal screening.

A parsimonious approach for screening moderate-to-profound hearing loss in a community-dwelling geriatric population based on a decision tree analysis

BACKGROUND

Hearing loss is one of the most common modifiable factors associated with cognitive and functional decline in geriatric populations. An accurate, easy-to-apply, and inexpensive hearing screening method is needed to detect hearing loss in community-dwelling elderly people, intervene early and reduce the negative consequences and burden of untreated hearing loss on individuals, families and society. However, available hearing screening tools do not adequately meet the need for large-scale geriatric hearing detection due to several barriers, including time, personnel training and equipment costs. This study aimed to propose an efficient method that could potentially satisfy this need.

METHODS

In total, 1793 participants (≥60 years) were recruited to undertake a standard audiometric air conduction pure tone test at 4 frequencies (0.5-4 kHz). Audiometric data from one community were used to train the decision tree model and generate a pure tone screening rule to classify people with or without moderate or more serious hearing impairment. Audiometric data from another community were used to validate the tree model.

RESULTS

In the decision tree analysis, 2 kHz and 0.5 kHz were found to be the most important frequencies for hearing severity classification. The tree model suggested a simple two-step screening procedure in which a 42 dB HL tone at 2 kHz is presented first, followed by a 47 dB HL tone at 0.5 kHz, depending on the individual's response to the first tone. This approach achieved an accuracy of 91.20% (91.92%), a sensitivity of 95.35% (93.50%) and a specificity of 86.85% (90.56%) in the training dataset (testing dataset).

CONCLUSIONS

A simple two-step screening procedure using the two tones (2 kHz and 0.5 kHz) selected by the decision tree analysis can be applied to screen moderate-to-profound hearing loss in a community-based geriatric population in Shanghai. The decision tree analysis is useful in determining the optimal hearing screening criteria for local elderly populations. Implanting the pair of tones into a well-calibrated sound generator may create a simple, practical and time-efficient screening tool with high accuracy that is readily available at healthcare centers of all levels, thereby facilitating the initiation of extensive nationwide hearing screening in older adults.

Economic Evaluations of Childhood Hearing Loss Screening Programmes: A Systematic Review and Critique

BACKGROUND

Permanent childhood hearing loss is one of the most common birth conditions associated with speech and language delay. A hearing screening can result in early detection and intervention for hearing loss.

OBJECTIVES

To update and expand previous systematic reviews of economic evaluations of childhood hearing screening strategies, and explore the methodological differences.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane database, National Health Services Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database, and Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health's (CADTH) Grey matters.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Economic evaluations reporting costs and outcomes for both the intervention and comparator arms related to childhood hearing screening strategies.

RESULTS

Thirty evaluations (from 29 articles) were included for review. Several methodological issues were identified, including: few evaluations reported outcomes in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs); none estimated utilities directly from surveying children; none included disutilities and costs associated with adverse events; few included costs and outcomes that differed by severity; few included long-term estimates; none considered acquired hearing loss; some did not present incremental results; and few conducted comprehensive univariate or probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Evaluations published post-2011 were more likely to report QALYs and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) as outcome measures, include long-term treatment and productivity costs, and present incremental results.

LIMITATIONS

We were unable to access the economic models and, although we employed an extensive search strategy, potentially not all relevant economic evaluations were identified.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Most economic evaluations concluded that childhood hearing screening is value for money. However, there were significant methodological limitations with the evaluations.