Examining unit costs for COVID-19 case management in Kenya

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on type 2 diabetes care and factors associated with care disruption in Kenya and Tanzania

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic affected healthcare delivery globally, impacting care access and delivery of essential services.

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the pandemic's impact on care for patients with type 2 diabetes and factors associated with care disruption in Kenya and Tanzania.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted among adults diagnosed with diabetes pre-COVID-19. Data were collected in February-April 2022 reflecting experiences at two time-points, three months before and the three months most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. A questionnaire captured data on blood glucose testing, changes in medication prescription and access, and healthcare provider access.

RESULTS

We recruited 1000 participants (500/country). Diabetes care was disrupted in both countries, with 34.8% and 32.8% of the participants reporting change in place and frequency of testing in Kenya, respectively. In Tanzania, 12.4% and 17.8% reported changes in location and frequency of glucose testing, respectively. The number of health facility visits declined, 14.4% (p < 0.001) in Kenya and 5.6% (p = 0.001) in Tanzania. In Kenya, there was a higher likelihood of severe care disruption among insured patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.56, 95% confidence interval [CI][1.05-2.34]; p = 0.029) and a lower likelihood among patients residing in rural areas (aOR, 0.35[95%CI, 0.22-0.58]; p < 0.001). Tanzania had a lower likelihood of severe disruption among insured patients (aOR, 0.51[95%CI, 0.33-0.79]; p = 0.003) but higher likelihood among patients with low economic status (aOR, 1.81[95%CI, 1.14-2.88]; p = 0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 disrupted diabetes care more in Kenya than Tanzania. Health systems and emergency preparedness should be strengthened to ensure continuity of service provision for patients with diabetes.

The present value of human life losses associated with COVID-19 and likely productivity losses averted through COVID-19 vaccination in Madagascar

BACKGROUND

As of 3 March 2023, Madagascar had reported 1,422 deaths from COVID-19. Up to now, there hasn't been a study to estimate the Total Present Value of Human Life lostTPVHL MADAGASCAR , productivity losses, and potential productivity losses averted through COVID-19 vaccination for use in advocacy. The study reported in this paper aimed to fill these information gaps.

METHODS

The Human Capital Model (HCM) was used to estimate theTPVHL MADAGASCAR , which is the sum of the discounted value of human life losses among individuals in seven different age groups. The Present Value of Human Life for each age groupPVHL i was calculated by multiplying the discount factor, the undiscounted years of life, the non-health gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, and the number of COVID-19 deaths in that age group. To test the robustness of the results, the HCM was rerun five times, assuming (i) a 5% discount rate, (ii) a 10% discount rate, (iii) Africa's highest average life expectancy at birth of 78.76 years, (iv) the world's highest life expectancy of 88.17 years, (v) projected excess COVID-19 mortality of 11,418.66 deaths as of 3 March 2023 in Madagascar, and assuming different levels of vaccine coverage: 100%, 70%, 60.93%, and 8.266%.

RESULTS

The 1,422 human lives lost due to COVID-19 had aTPVHL MADAGASCAR of Int$ 46,331,412; and an average of Int$ 32,582 per human life. Re-estimation of the HCM, using (i) discount rates of 5% and 10% reducedTPVHL MADAGASCAR by 23% and 53%, respectively; (ii) average life expectancies of 78.76 years and 88.17 years increasedTPVHL MADAGASCAR by 23.7% and 39.5%, respectively; (iii) projected excess COVID-19 mortality of 11,418.66 augmentedTPVHL MADAGASCAR by 703%. Furthermore, it is estimated that vaccinating 70% of the target population could potentially save the country Int$ 1.1 billion, equivalent to 1.94% of the GDP.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant health and productivity losses for Madagascar. Optimizing COVID-19 vaccination coverage for the target population could substantially reduce these losses.

The global economic burden of COVID-19 disease: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a considerable threat to the economics of patients, health systems, and society.

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aims to quantitatively assess the global economic burden of COVID-19.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed in the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to identify studies examining the economic impact of COVID-19. The selected studies were classified into two categories based on the cost-of-illness (COI) study approach: top-down and bottom-up studies. The results of top-down COI studies were presented by calculating the average costs as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) and health expenditures. Conversely, the findings of bottom-up studies were analyzed through meta-analysis using the standardized mean difference.

RESULTS

The implemented search strategy yielded 3271 records, of which 27 studies met the inclusion criteria, consisting of 7 top-down and 20 bottom-up studies. The included studies were conducted in various countries, including the USA (5), China (5), Spain (2), Brazil (2), South Korea (2), India (2), and one study each in Italy, South Africa, the Philippines, Greece, Iran, Kenya, Nigeria, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The results of the top-down studies indicated that indirect costs represent 10.53% of GDP, while the total estimated cost accounts for 85.91% of healthcare expenditures and 9.13% of GDP. In contrast, the bottom-up studies revealed that the average direct medical costs ranged from US $1264 to US $79,315. The meta-analysis demonstrated that the medical costs for COVID-19 patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) were approximately twice as high as those for patients in general wards, with a range from 0.05 to 3.48 times higher.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicates that the COVID-19 pandemic has imposed a significant economic burden worldwide, with varying degrees of impact across countries. The findings of our study, along with those of other research, underscore the vital role of economic consequences in the post-COVID-19 era for communities and families. Therefore, policymakers and health administrators should prioritize economic programs and accord them heightened attention.

Cost of illness studies in COVID-19: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Human communities suffered a vast socioeconomic burden in dealing with the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) globally. Real-word data about these burdens can inform governments about evidence-based resource allocation and prioritization. The aim of this scoping review was to map the cost-of-illness (CoI) studies associated with COVID-19.

METHODS

This scoping review was conducted from January 2019 to December 2021. We searched cost-of-illness papers published in English within Web of Sciences, PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Science Direct and ProQuest. For each eligible study, extracted data included country, publication year, study period, study design, epidemiological approach, costing method, cost type, cost identification, sensitivity analysis, estimated unit cost and national burden. All of the analyses were applied in Excel software.

RESULTS

2352 records were found after the search strategy application, finally 28 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Most of the studies were done in the United States, Turkey, and China. The prevalence-based approach was the most common in the studies, and most of studies also used Hospital Information System data (HIS). There were noticeable differences in the costing methods and the cost identification. The average cost of hospitalization per patient per day ranged from 101$ in Turkey to 2,364$ in the United States. Among the studies, 82.1% estimated particularly direct medical costs, 3.6% only indirect costs, and 14.3% both direct and indirect costs.

CONCLUSION

The economic burden of COVID-19 varies from country to country. The majority of CoI studies estimated direct medical costs associated with COVID-19 and there is a paucity of evidence for direct non-medical, indirect, and intangible costs, which we recommend for future studies. To create homogeneity in CoI studies, we suggest researchers follow a conceptual framework and critical appraisal checklist of cost-of-illness (CoI) studies.

Costs of inpatient care and out-of-pocket payments for COVID-19 patients: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To identify the costs of hospital care for patients with COVID-19 and the amount of out-of-pocket payments.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review using Scopus and WEB OF SCIENCE and PubMed databases in April 5, 2022 and then updated in January 15, 2023. English articles with no publication year restrictions were included with study designs of cost-of-illness (COI) studies, cost analyses, and observational reports (cross-sectional studies and prospective and retrospective cohorts) that calculated the patient-level cost of care for COVID-19. Costs are reported in USD with purchasing power parity (PPP) conversion in 2020. The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42022334337.

RESULTS

The results showed that the highest total cost of hospitalization in intensive care per patient was 100789 USD, which was reported in Germany, and the lowest cost was 5436.77 USD, which was reported in Romania. In the present study, in the special care department, the highest percentage of total expenses is related to treatment expenses (42.23 percent), while in the inpatient department, the highest percentage of total expenses is related to the costs of hospital beds/day of routine services (39.07 percent). The highest percentage of out-of-pocket payments was 30.65 percent, reported in China, and the lowest percentage of out-of-pocket payments was 1.12 percent, reported in Iran. The highest indirect cost per hospitalization was 16049 USD, reported in USA, and the lowest was 449.07 USD, reported in India.

CONCLUSION

The results show that the COVID-19 disease imposed a high cost of hospitalization, mainly the cost of hospital beds/day of routine services. Studies have used different methods for calculating the costs, and this has negatively impacted the comparability costs across studies. Therefore, it would be beneficial for researchers to use a similar cost calculation model to increase the compatibility of different studies. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42022334337.

Assessment of hospitalisation costs and their determinants among Covid-19 patients in South Central Ethiopia

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic is a global public health problem. The Covid-19 pandemic has had a substantial impact on the economy of developing countries, including Ethiopia.This study aimed to determine the hospitalisation costs of Covid-19 and the factors associated with the high cost of hospitalisation in South Central Ethiopia.

METHODS

A retrospective cost analysis of Covid-19 patients hospitalised between July 2020 and July 2021 at Bokoji Hospital Covid-19 Treatment Centre was conducted using both the micro-costing and top-down approaches from the health system perspective. This analysis used cost data obtained from administrative reports, the financial reports of the treatment centre, procurement invoices and the Covid-19 standard treatment guidelines. The Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test or Kruskal-Wallis test was employed to test the difference between sociodemographic and clinical factors when appropriate.To identify the determinants of cost drivers in the study population, a generalised linear model with gamma distribution and log link with a stepwise algorithm were used.

RESULTS

A total of 692 Covid-19 patients were included in the costing analysis. In this study, the mean cost of Covid-19-infected patients with no symptoms was US$1,073.86, with mild symptoms US$1,100.74, with moderate symptoms US$1,394.74 and in severe-critically ill condition US$1,708.05.The overall mean cost was US$1,382.50(95% CI: 1,360.60-1,404.40) per treated episode.The highest mean cost was observed for personnel, accounting for 64.0% of the overall cost. Older age, pre-existing diseases, advanced disease severity at admission, admission to the intensive care unit, prolonged stay on treatment and intranasal oxygen support were strongly associated with higher costs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that the clinical management of Covid-19 patients incurred significant expenses to the health system. Factors such as older age, disease severity, presence of comorbidities, use of inhalation oxygen therapy and prolonged hospital stay were associated with higher hospitalisation costs.Therefore, the government should give priority to the elderly and those with comorbidities in the provision of vaccination to reduce the financial burden on health facilities and health systems in terms of resource utilisation.

Policies and resources for strengthening of emergency and critical care services in the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic in Kenya

Critical illnesses cause several million deaths annually, with many of these occurring in low-resource settings like Kenya. Great efforts have been made worldwide to scale up critical care to reduce deaths from COVID-19. Lower income countries with fragile health systems may not have had sufficient resources to upscale their critical care. We aimed to review how efforts to strengthen emergency and critical care were operationalised during the pandemic in Kenya to point towards how future emergencies should be approached. This was an exploratory study that involved document reviews, and discussions with key stakeholders (donors, international agencies, professional associations, government actors), during the first year of the pandemic in Kenya. Our findings suggest that pre-pandemic health services for the critically ill in Kenya were sparse and unable to meet rising demand, with major limitations noted in human resources and infrastructure. The pandemic response saw galvanised action by the Government of Kenya and other agencies to mobilise resources (approximately USD 218 million). Earlier efforts were largely directed towards advanced critical care but since the human resource gap could not be reduced immediately, a lot of equipment remained unused. We also note that despite strong policies on what resources should be available, the reality on the ground was that there were often critical shortages. While emergency response mechanisms are not conducive to addressing long-term health system issues, the pandemic increased global recognition of the need to fund care for the critically ill. Limited resources may be best prioritised towards a public health approach with focus on provision of relatively basic, lower cost essential emergency and critical care (EECC) that can potentially save the most lives amongst critically ill patients.

Household costs and care seeking patterns associated with COVID-19 in Blantyre, Malawi

Economic consequences of COVID-19 illness and healthcare use for households in low income countries are not well known. We estimated costs associated with COVID-19 care-seeking and treatment from a household perspective and assessed determinants of treatment costs. A cross-sectional household survey was conducted between December 2020 and November 2021 in urban and peri-urban areas of Blantyre district. Adults (age ≥18 years) with confirmed COVID-19 were asked to report the symptoms they experienced or prompted them to seek COVID-19 tests as well as healthcare seeking behaviors preceding and following COVID-19 diagnosis. For individuals who sought healthcare, information on out-of-pocket expenditures incurred while seeking and receiving care including on transport, food etc. by both the patients and their guardians was collected. Finally, data on time use seeking, receiving care and during convalesces was recorded. Multivariate Generalized Linear Models were used to evaluate association between household COVID-19 costs and their determinants. Of 171 individuals who took part in the study, the average age was 40.7 years, standard deviation (SD) 15.0, and 50.8% were females. Most participants (85.3%) were symptomatic. Of these, 67.8% sought care at health facilities and the majority (91.7%) were treated as outpatients. The average total household cost associated with COVID-19 seeking, receiving care and convalescence was $62.81 (SD $126.02). Average costs for outpatient and inpatient cases were $52.96 (SD $54.35) and $172.39 (SD $407.08), respectively. Average out-of-pocket household expenditures were $42.62 (SD $123.10), accounting for 62% of total household costs. Being a male COVID-19 patient and engagement in formal employment were significantly associated with high COVID-19 household costs. Households face high economic burden related to COVID-19 sickness and healthcare use. Social policies that support households cope with both the direct and indirect COVID-19 cost are needed to ensure access to healthcare and protect households from COVID-19 related shocks.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of COVID-19 critical care interventions in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a modeling study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate and compare the cost-effectiveness of COVID-19 critical care intervention approaches: noninvasive (oxygen without intubation) and invasive (intubation) management in Ethiopia.

METHODS

A Markov model is used to compare the costs and outcomes for non-invasive and invasive COVID-19 clinical interventions using both primary and secondary data sources. Healthcare provider costs (recurrent and capital cost) and patient-side costs (direct and indirect) were estimated and reported in United States Dollars (US$), 2021. The outcome measure used in this analysis was DALYs averted. Both the average cost-effectiveness ratio (ACER) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were reported. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were applied to assess the robustness of the findings. The analysis is conducted using Tree Age pro health care software 2022.

RESULT

The average cost per patient per episode for mild/moderate, severe, noninvasive, and invasive critical management was $951, $3449, $5514, and $6500, respectively. According to the average cost-effective ratio (ACER), non-invasive management resulted in $1991 per DALY averted, while invasive management resulted in $3998 per DALY averted. Similarly, the incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER) of invasive compared to noninvasive management was $ 4948 per DALY averted.

CONCLUSION

Clinical management of critical COVID-19 cases in Ethiopia is associated with a significant financial burden. Invasive intervention is unlikely to be a cost-effective COVID-19 intervention in Ethiopia compared to noninvasive critical case management using a willingness to pay threshold of three times GDP per capita.

Phase and wave dependent analysis of health expenditure efficiency: A sample of OECD evidence

Introduction

Health expenditures are a factor that reflects the government's public health policy and contributes to the protection of national health. Therefore, this study focuses on measuring the effectiveness of health expenditures in order to evaluate and improve the public health system and policy during the pandemic period.

Method

In order to examine the effectiveness of health expenditures, the behaviors of the pandemic process were analyzed in two stages. The number of daily cases is analyzed in the first stage by dividing it into waves and phases according to the transmission coefficient (R). For this classification, the discrete cumulative Fourier function estimation is used. In the second stage, the unit root test method was used to estimate the stationarity of the number of cases in order to examine whether the countries made effective health expenditures according to waves and phases. The series being stationary indicates that the cases are predictable and that health expenditure is efficient. Data consists of daily cases from February 2020 to November 2021 for 5 OECD countries.

Conclusion

The general results are shown that cases cannot be predicted, especially in the first stage of the pandemic. In the relaxation phase and at the beginning of the second wave, the countries that were seriously affected by the epidemic started to control the number of cas es by taking adequate measures, thus increasing the efficiency of their health systems. The common feature of all the countries we examined is that phase 1, which represents the beginning of the waves, is not stationary. After the waves fade, it can be concluded that the stationary number of health cases cannot be sustainable in preventing new waves' formation. It is seen that countries cannot make effective health expenditures for each wave and stage. According to these findings, the periods in which countries made effective health expenditures during the pandemic are shown.

Discussion

The study aims to help countries make effective short- and long-term decisions about pandemics. The research provides a view of the effectiveness of health expenditures on the number of cases per day in 5 OECD countries during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

COVID-19 Pandemic Impacted Food Security and Caused Psychosocial Stress in Selected States of Nigeria

The COVID-19 disease has infected many countries, causing generalized impacts on different income categories. We carried out a survey among households (n = 412) representing different income groups in Nigeria. We used validated food insecurity experience and socio-psychologic tools. Data obtained were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. The earning capacities of the respondents ranged from 145 USD/month for low-income earners to 1945 USD/month for high-income earners. A total of 173 households (42%) ran out of food during the COVID-19 pandemic. All categories of households experienced increasing dependency on the general public and a perception of increasing insecurity, with the high-income earners experiencing the greatest shift. In addition, increasing levels of anger and irritation were experienced among all categories. Of the socio-demographic variables, only gender, educational level of the household head, work hours per day, and family income based on society class were associated (p < 0.05) with food security and hunger due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although psychological stress was observed to be greater in the low-income earning group, household heads with medium and high family income were more likely to have satisfactory experiences regarding food security and hunger. It is recommended that socio-economic groups should be mapped and support systems should target each group to provide the needed support in terms of health, social, economic, and mental wellness.

Essential emergency and critical care as a health system response to critical illness and the COVID19 pandemic: what does it cost?

Essential Emergency and Critical Care (EECC) is a novel approach to the care of critically ill patients, focusing on first-tier, effective, low-cost, life-saving care and designed to be feasible even in low-resourced and low-staffed settings. This is distinct from advanced critical care, usually conducted in ICUs with specialised staff, facilities and technologies. This paper estimates the incremental cost of EECC and advanced critical care for the planning of care for critically ill patients in Tanzania and Kenya.The incremental costing took a health systems perspective. A normative approach based on the ingredients defined through the recently published global consensus on EECC was used. The setting was a district hospital in which the patient is provided with the definitive care typically provided at that level for their condition. Quantification of resource use was based on COVID-19 as a tracer condition using clinical expertise. Local prices were used where available, and all costs were converted to USD2020.The costs per patient day of EECC is estimated to be 1 USD, 11 USD and 33 USD in Tanzania and 2 USD, 14 USD and 37 USD in Kenya, for moderate, severe and critical COVID-19 patients respectively. The cost per patient day of advanced critical care is estimated to be 13 USD and 294 USD in Tanzania and USD 17 USD and 345 USD in Kenya for severe and critical COVID-19 patients, respectively.EECC is a novel approach for providing the essential care to all critically ill patients. The low costs and lower tech approach inherent in delivering EECC mean that EECC could be provided to many and suggests that prioritizing EECC over ACC may be a rational approach when resources are limited.

Estimated global public health and economic impact of COVID-19 vaccines in the pre-omicron era using real-world empirical data

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available describing the global impact of COVID-19 vaccines. This study estimated the global public health and economic impact of COVID-19 vaccines before the emergence of the Omicron variant.

METHODS

A static model covering 215 countries/territories compared the direct effects of COVID-19 vaccination to no vaccination during 13 December 2020-30 September 2021. After adjusting for underreporting of cases and deaths, base case analyses estimated total cases and deaths averted, and direct outpatient and productivity costs saved through averted health outcomes. Sensitivity analyses applied alternative model assumptions.

RESULTS

COVID-19 vaccines prevented an estimated median (IQR) of 151.7 (133.7-226.1) million cases and 620.5 (411.1-698.1) thousand deaths globally through September 2021. In sensitivity analysis applying an alternative underreporting assumption, median deaths averted were 2.1 million. Estimated direct outpatient cost savings were $21.2 ($18.9-30.9) billion and indirect savings of avoided productivity loss were $135.1 ($121.1-206.4) billion, yielding a total cost savings of $155 billion globally through averted infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a conservative modeling approach that considered direct effects only, we estimated that COVID-19 vaccines have averted millions of infections and deaths, generating billions of cost savings worldwide, which underscore the continued importance of vaccination in public health response to COVID-19.

Cost analysis of a teaching hospital in Thailand: Impacts of the first wave of COVID-19

COVID-19 has had adverse impacts on the health sector in Thailand and information on hospital costs is required for planning and budgeting. The aim of this study was to estimate costs that the pandemic imposed on a teaching hospital in the country, focusing on the first wave which took place in March-May 2020. A retrospective cost analysis was performed. Data on COVID-related activities, including when and where they were undertaken, were retrieved from existing sources and supplemented by in-depth interviews with the hospital’s staff. The data collection period was January-October 2020, covering three distinct phases: before, during, and after the first wave of the pandemic. The total costs during the preparation phase in January-February, the pandemic phase in March-May, and the standby phase in June-October were 0.6, 3.9, and 1.2 million US dollars respectively. Costs related to treatment of COVID-19 patients were higher than those related to infection control in the first two phases but not in the standby phase, making up 82.09%, 75.23%, and 43.95% of the total costs in the three phases respectively. Costs were incurred in all areas of the hospital, including those that were set up to serve COVID patients, those serving non-COVID patients, and those serving both groups. Public donations were integral to the provision of services and made up 20.94% of the total cost during the pandemic phase. This study was the first to estimate hospital costs of COVID-19 in Thailand. It demonstrated high costs of a national outbreak and supported the establishment of a contingency fund for medical emergencies at the hospital level.

Predicting the cost of COVID-19 treatment and its drivers in Indonesia: analysis of claims data of COVID-19 in 2020-2021

BACKGROUND

Recent Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic shows that health system, particularly hospital care, takes the highest toll on COVID-19. As hospital gets to manage the surge of COVID-19 cases, it is important to standardize treatment standard and package for COVID-19. Until recently, in Indonesia, COVID-19 curative package in hospital is paid using a retrospective payment system (claims system) using a per-diem rate. Quantifying standard cost using an established retrospective claims dataset is important as a basis for standard formulation for COVID-19 package treatment, should COVID-19 be accommodated into the benefit package for Universal Health Coverage (UHC) under the National Health Insurance.

METHODS

We estimated a standard cost for COVID-19 treatment using provider's perspective. The analysis was conducted retrospectively using established national COVID-19 claims dataset during January 2020 until 2021. Utilizing individual-or-patient level analysis, claims profile were broken down per-patient, yielding descriptive clinical and care-related profile. Estimate of price and charge were measured in average. Moreover, indicators were regressed to the total charged price (in logarithmic scale) so as to find the predictors of cost.

RESULTS

Based on the analysis of 102,065 total claims data received by MOH in 2020-2021, there is an average claim payment for COVID-19 in the amount of IDR 74,52 million (USD$ 5175). Significant difference exists in hospital tariffs or price to the existing claims data, indicating profit for hospital within its role in managing COVID-19 cases. Claim amount predictors were found to be associated with change of claim amount, including high level of severity, hospital class, intensive care room occupancy and ventilator usage, as well as mortality.

CONCLUSION

As COVID-19 pandemic shifts towards an endemic, countries including Indonesia need to reflect on the existing payment system and move towards a more sustainable payment mechanism for COVID-19. The COVID-19 payment system needs to be integrated into the existing national health insurance allowing bundled payment to become more sustainable, which can be achieved by comprehensively formulating the bundled payment package for COVID-19.

Epidemiological impact and cost-effectiveness analysis of COVID-19 vaccination in Kenya

BACKGROUND

A few studies have assessed the epidemiological impact and the cost-effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in settings where most of the population had been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHODS

We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of COVID-19 vaccine in Kenya from a societal perspective over a 1.5-year time frame. An age-structured transmission model assumed at least 80% of the population to have prior natural immunity when an immune escape variant was introduced. We examine the effect of slow (18 months) or rapid (6 months) vaccine roll-out with vaccine coverage of 30%, 50% or 70% of the adult (>18 years) population prioritising roll-out in those over 50-years (80% uptake in all scenarios). Cost data were obtained from primary analyses. We assumed vaccine procurement at US$7 per dose and vaccine delivery costs of US$3.90-US$6.11 per dose. The cost-effectiveness threshold was US$919.11.

FINDINGS

Slow roll-out at 30% coverage largely targets those over 50 years and resulted in 54% fewer deaths (8132 (7914-8373)) than no vaccination and was cost saving (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, ICER=US$-1343 (US$-1345 to US$-1341) per disability-adjusted life-year, DALY averted). Increasing coverage to 50% and 70%, further reduced deaths by 12% (810 (757-872) and 5% (282 (251-317) but was not cost-effective, using Kenya's cost-effectiveness threshold (US$919.11). Rapid roll-out with 30% coverage averted 63% more deaths and was more cost-saving (ICER=US$-1607 (US$-1609 to US$-1604) per DALY averted) compared with slow roll-out at the same coverage level, but 50% and 70% coverage scenarios were not cost-effective.

INTERPRETATION

With prior exposure partially protecting much of the Kenyan population, vaccination of young adults may no longer be cost-effective.

A pilot phase Ib/II study of whole-lung low dose radiation therapy (LDRT) for the treatment of severe COVID-19 pneumonia: First experience from Africa

Background

Low dose radiation therapy (LDRT) has been used for non-malignant conditions since early 1900s based on the ability of single fractions between 50–150 cGy to inhibit cellular proliferation. Given scarcity of resources, poor access to vaccines and medical therapies within low and middle income countries, there is an urgent need to identify other cost-effective alternatives in management of COVID-19 pneumonia. We conducted a pilot phase Ib/II investigator-initiated clinical trial to assess the safety, feasibility, and toxicity of LDRT in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia at the Aga Khan University Hospital in Nairobi, Kenya. Additionally, we also assessed clinical benefit in terms of improvement in oxygenation at day 3 following LDRT and the ability to avoid mechanical ventilation at day 7 post LDRT.

Methods

Patients with both polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and high-resolution computer tomogram (HRCT) confirmed severe COVID-19 pneumonia, not improving on conventional therapy including Dexamethasone and with increasing oxygen requirement were enrolled in the study. Patients on mechanical ventilation were excluded. Eligible patients received a single 100cGy fraction to the whole lung. In the absence of any dose limiting toxicity the study proposed to treat a total of 10 patients. The primary endpoints were to assess the safety/feasibility, and toxicity within the first 24 hours post LDRT. The secondary endpoints were to assess efficacy of LDRT at Day 3, 7, 14 and 28 post LDRT.

Results

Ten patients were treated with LDRT. All (100%) of patients were able to complete LDRT without treatment related SAE within the first 24 hours post treatment. None of the patients treated with LDRT experienced any acute toxicity as defined by change in clinical and respiratory status at 24hr following LDRT. Majority (90%) of patients avoided mechanical ventilation within 7 days of LDRT. Four patients (40%) demonstrated at least 25% improvement in oxygen requirements within 3 days. Six patients (60%) were discharged and remained off oxygen, whereas four progressed and died (1 due to sepsis and 3 in cytokine storm). Median time to discharge (n = 6) was 16.5 days and median time to death (n = 4) was 11.0 days. Patients who ultimately died showed elevated inflammatory markers including Ferritin, CRP and D-dimers as compared to those who were discharged alive.

Conclusion

LDRT was feasible, safe and shows promise in the management of severe COVID-19 pneumonia including in patients progressing on conventional systemic treatment. Additional phase II trials are warranted to identify patients most likely to benefit from LDRT.

Hospitalization costs for COVID-19 in Ethiopia: Empirical data and analysis from Addis Ababa's largest dedicated treatment center

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused profound health, economic, and social disruptions globally. We assessed the full costs of hospitalization for COVID-19 disease at Ekka Kotebe COVID-19 treatment center in Addis Ababa, the largest hospital dedicated to COVID-19 patient care in Ethiopia.

Methods and findings

We retrospectively collected and analysed clinical and cost data on patients admitted to Ekka Kotebe with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infections. Cost data included personnel time and salaries, drugs, medical supplies and equipment, facility utilities, and capital costs. Facility medical records were reviewed to assess the average duration of stay by disease severity (either moderate, severe, or critical). The data collected covered the time-period March-November 2020. We then estimated the cost per treated COVID-19 episode, stratified by disease severity, from the perspective of the provider. Over the study period there were 2,543 COVID-19 cases treated at Ekka Kotebe, of which, 235 were critical, 515 were severe, and 1,841 were moderate. The mean patient duration of stay varied from 9.2 days (95% CI: 7.6–10.9; for moderate cases) to 19.2 days (17.9–20.6; for critical cases). The mean cost per treated episode was USD 1,473 (95% CI: 1,197–1,750), but cost varied by disease severity: the mean cost for moderate, severe, and critical cases were USD 1,266 (998–1,534), USD 1,545 (1,413–1,677), and USD 2,637 (1,788–3,486), respectively.

Conclusions

Clinical management and treatment of COVID-19 patients poses an enormous economic burden to the Ethiopian health system. Such estimates of COVID-19 treatment costs inform financial implications for resource-constrained health systems and reinforce the urgency of implementing effective infection prevention and control policies, including the rapid rollout of COVID-19 vaccines, in low-income countries like Ethiopia.

Experience of Rwanda on COVID-19 Case Management: From Uncertainties to the Era of Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibodies

The management of COVID-19 in Rwanda has been dynamic, and the use of COVID-19 therapeutics has gradually been updated based on scientific discoveries. The treatment for COVID-19 remained patient-centered and entirely state-sponsored during the first and second waves. From the time of identification of the index case in March 2020 up to August 2021, three versions of the clinical management guidelines were developed, with the aim of ensuring that the COVID-19 patients treated in Rwanda were receiving care based on the most recent therapeutic discoveries. As the case load increased and imposed imminent heavy burdens on the healthcare system, a smooth transition was made to enable that the asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 cases could continue to be closely observed and managed while they remained in their homes. The care provided to patients requiring facility-based interventions mainly focused on the provision of anti-inflammatory drugs, anticoagulation, broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy, management of hyperglycemia and the provision of therapeutics with a direct antiviral effect such as favipiravir and neutralizing monoclonal antibodies. The time to viral clearance was observed to be shortest among eligible patients treated with neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (bamlanivimab). Moving forward, as we strive to continue detecting COVID-19 cases as early as possible, and promptly initiate supportive interventions, the use of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies constitutes an attractive and cost-effective therapeutic approach. If this approach is used strategically along with other measures in place (i.e., COVID-19 vaccine roll out, etc.), it will enable us to bring this global battle against the COVID-19 pandemic under full control and with a low case fatality rate.

Amplified parallel antigen rapid test for point-of-care salivary detection of SARS-CoV-2 with improved sensitivity

In the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, simple, rapid, point-of-care tests not requiring trained personnel for primary care testing are essential. Saliva-based antigen rapid tests (ARTs) can fulfil this need, but these tests require overnight-fasted samples; without which independent studies have demonstrated sensitivities of only 11.7 to 23.1%. Herein, we report an Amplified Parallel ART (AP-ART) with sensitivity above 90%, even with non-fasted samples. The virus was captured multimodally, using both anti-spike protein antibodies and Angiotensin Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2) protein. It also featured two parallel flow channels. The first contained spike protein binding gold nanoparticles which produced a visible red line upon encountering the virus. The second contained signal amplifying nanoparticles that complex with the former and amplify the signal without any linker. Compared to existing dual gold amplification techniques, a limit of detection of one order of magnitude lower was achieved (0.0064 ng·mL^-1). AP-ART performance in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in saliva of COVID-19 patients was investigated using a case-control study (139 participants enrolled and 162 saliva samples tested). Unlike commercially available ARTs, the sensitivity of AP-ART was maintained even when non-fasting saliva was used. Compared to the gold standard reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction testing on nasopharyngeal samples, non-fasting saliva tested on AP-ART showed a sensitivity of 97.0% (95% CI: 84.7-99.8); without amplification, the sensitivity was 72.7% (95% CI: 83.7-94.8). Thus, AP-ART has the potential to be developed for point-of-care testing, which may be particularly important in resource-limited settings, and for early diagnosis to initiate newly approved therapies to reduce COVID-19 severity.

Cost estimates of COVID-19 clinical management in Myanmar

Objective

This study aims to estimate the cost of clinical management of COVID-19 infected patients based on their severity by exploring the resources used in health care provision in Myanmar.

Methods

A multicenter retrospective cost analysis of COVID-19 patients was performed using the micro-costing approach from the perspective of the health system. It covered two cost components, namely direct and indirect cost of treating a patient. Input data and their quantities were obtained from COVID-19 Standard Treatment Guidelines of Ministry of Health and Sports, and administrative and financial records of resource utilization of three designated health facilities in Yangon Region. Valuation of these resources was based on the price list from the Procurement Section of the Ministry.

Results

This study estimated the unit cost of clinical management of COVID-19 infected patients with no symptom to be 953,552 MMK(717 USD), with mild-moderate symptoms to be 1,155,222 MMK(869 USD) and with severe-critically ill conditions to be 5,705,052 MMK(4290 USD). Average cost for a patient par day was 86,687 MMK(65 USD) for asymptomatic patients, 105,020 MMK(79 USD) for mild-moderate patients and 283,252 MMK(214 USD) for severe-critically ill patients. Since the first case detected till December 31, 2020, COVID-19 clinical management cost was accounted for 139 Billion MMK (104 Million USD) for total 124,630 confirmed cases.

Conclusions

COVID-19 pandemic has caused health systems to incur the significant health care expenses. Timely implementation of the sustainable, affordable and efficient policy for COVID-19 responses is of utmost important for every nation especially in the face of a pandemic. This study provides the fundamental inputs for strategic planning, for future economic evaluations of different policy interventions, and policy recommendations for health systems to remain resilient during and after the COVID-19 pandemic in Myanmar.

Modelling the cost-effectiveness of essential and advanced critical care for COVID-19 patients in Kenya

BACKGROUND

Case management of symptomatic COVID-19 patients is a key health system intervention. The Kenyan government embarked to fill capacity gaps in essential and advanced critical care (ACC) needed for the management of severe and critical COVID-19. However, given scarce resources, gaps in both essential and ACC persist. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of investments in essential and ACC to inform the prioritisation of investment decisions.

METHODS

We employed a decision tree model to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness of investment in essential care (EC) and investment in both essential and ACC (EC +ACC) compared with current healthcare provision capacity (status quo) for COVID-19 patients in Kenya. We used a health system perspective, and an inpatient care episode time horizon. Cost data were obtained from primary empirical analysis while outcomes data were obtained from epidemiological model estimates. We used univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis to assess the robustness of the results.

RESULTS

The status quo option is more costly and less effective compared with investment in EC and is thus dominated by the later. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of investment in essential and ACC (EC+ACC) was US$1378.21 per disability-adjusted life-year averted and hence not a cost-effective strategy when compared with Kenya's cost-effectiveness threshold (US$908).

CONCLUSION

When the criterion of cost-effectiveness is considered, and within the context of resource scarcity, Kenya will achieve better value for money if it prioritises investments in EC before investments in ACC. This information on cost-effectiveness will however need to be considered as part of a multicriteria decision-making framework that uses a range of criteria that reflect societal values of the Kenyan society.

COVID-19 in Multimorbid Patients-A Controlled Microcost Description Analysis of Diagnosis Related Group (DRG)-Case Series in Acute Care without Non-Invasive Ventilation

Diagnosis-related cost analyzes are important for health economic planning and decision-making. They form the basis for further developing of remuneration systems for health services. The rapid increase in hospital stays by COVID-19 patients requires a valid and exact calculation of the treatment costs. COVID-19 patients with many accompanying illnesses increase the requirements for a cost calculation. The focus of this work is to carry out a DRG-related micro-cost analysis, considering the age, length of stay and comorbidities of COVID-19 patients. So far, there is little information about treatment costs for multimorbid patients with COVID-19 who have not received invasive ventilation. The method is based on a standardized cost unit calculation for determining the treatment costs in a German hospital. The costs (€) of inpatients treated with COVID-19 were compared with a control group of the same DRGs of patients without COVID-19. The average total costs for inpatient treatment were €2866. The highest share of costs falls on nursing, personnel, and material costs of the non-medical infrastructure. Frequent comorbidities were heart failure, diabetes mellitus, other respiratory diseases, dizziness, and impairment of the musculoskeletal system.

Examining the cost-effectiveness of personal protective equipment for formal healthcare workers in Kenya during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers are at a higher risk of COVID-19 infection during care encounters compared to the general population. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) have been shown to protect COVID-19 among healthcare workers, however, Kenya has faced PPE shortages that can adequately protect all healthcare workers. We, therefore, examined the health and economic consequences of investing in PPE for healthcare workers in Kenya.

METHODS

We conducted a cost-effectiveness and return on investment (ROI) analysis using a decision-analytic model following the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) guidelines. We examined two outcomes: 1) the incremental cost per healthcare worker death averted, and 2) the incremental cost per healthcare worker COVID-19 case averted. We performed a multivariate sensitivity analysis using 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations.

RESULTS

Kenya would need to invest $3.12 million (95% CI: 2.65-3.59) to adequately protect healthcare workers against COVID-19. This investment would avert 416 (IQR: 330-517) and 30,041 (IQR: 7243 - 102,480) healthcare worker deaths and COVID-19 cases respectively. Additionally, such an investment would result in a healthcare system ROI of $170.64 million (IQR: 138-209) - equivalent to an 11.04 times return.

CONCLUSION

Despite other nationwide COVID-19 prevention measures such as social distancing, over 70% of healthcare workers will still be infected if the availability of PPE remains scarce. As part of the COVID-19 response strategy, the government should consider adequate investment in PPE for all healthcare workers in the country as it provides a large return on investment and it is value for money.

Essential Emergency and Critical Care: a consensus among global clinical experts

BACKGROUND

Globally, critical illness results in millions of deaths every year. Although many of these deaths are potentially preventable, the basic, life-saving care of critically ill patients are often overlooked in health systems. Essential Emergency and Critical Care (EECC) has been devised as the care that should be provided to all critically ill patients in all hospitals in the world. EECC includes the effective care of low cost and low complexity for the identification and treatment of critically ill patients across all medical specialties. This study aimed to specify the content of EECC and additionally, given the surge of critical illness in the ongoing pandemic, the essential diagnosis-specific care for critically ill patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

In a Delphi process, consensus (>90% agreement) was sought from a diverse panel of global clinical experts. The panel iteratively rated proposed treatments and actions based on previous guidelines and the WHO/ICRC's Basic Emergency Care. The output from the Delphi was adapted iteratively with specialist reviewers into a coherent and feasible package of clinical processes plus a list of hospital readiness requirements.

RESULTS

The 269 experts in the Delphi panel had clinical experience in different acute medical specialties from 59 countries and from all resource settings. The agreed EECC package contains 40 clinical processes and 67 requirements, plus additions specific for COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

The study has specified the content of care that should be provided to all critically ill patients. Implementing EECC could be an effective strategy for policy makers to reduce preventable deaths worldwide.

Resource availability, utilisation and cost in the provision of critical care in Tanzania: a protocol for a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Critical care is essential in saving lives of those that are critically ill, however, provision of critical care can be costly and heterogeneous across lower-resource settings. This paper describes the protocol for a systematic review of the literature that aims to identify the reported costs and resources available for the provision of critical care and the forms of critical care provision in Tanzania.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Three databases (MEDLINE, Embase and Global Health) will be searched to identify articles that report the forms of critical care, resources used in the provision of critical care in Tanzania, their availability and the associated costs. The search strategy will be developed from four key concepts; critical care provision, critical illness, resource use, Tanzania. The articles that fulfil the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be assessed for quality using the Reference Case for Estimating the Costs of Global Health Services and Interventions checklist. The extracted data will be summarised using descriptive statistics including frequencies, mean and median of the quantity and costs of resources used in the components of critical care services, depending on the data availability. This study will be carried out between February and November 2021.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study is a review of secondary data and ethical clearance was sought from and granted by the Tanzanian National Institute of Medical Research (reference: NIMR/HQ/R.8a/Vol. IX/3537) and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (ethics ref: 22866). We will publish the review in a peer-reviewed journal as an open access article in addition to presenting the findings at conferences and public scientific gatherings.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

The protocol was registered with PROSPERO; registration number: CRD42020221923.