Government decision on national human papillomavirus vaccine programme is a sad day for sexual health

Is There Something Else Beyond Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Public Health Decision Making?

Healthcare costs are a concern for the sustainability of health systems in both rich and poor countries. Achieving a balance between the aspirations of payers and the manufacturers of new technologies is a challenge for democratic societies. Evidence about the efficacy and effectiveness of a new intervention is a fundamental aspect for its inclusion, but additional information about organization, implementation, and feasibility is required. Economic evaluations, especially cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA), help inform the choice of a particular health intervention, but they are not the only input for decision making (DM). Use of CEA is relatively recent but has quickly become widespread. CEA techniques have evolved into increasingly complex and sophisticated methods intended to reflect reality closely but, at the same time, their results have become more difficult to verify and validate. In developed countries, CEA results have generated intense debates, but in developing countries, these reflections are still weak due to lack of technical capacity. Competing perspectives on CEAs exist and can heavily influence the DM process. The use of CEAs and the interpretation of their results requires critical analysis, especially when public funds are to be invested. Here, we present a perspective on the use of CEAs for DM that arises from our experience of its use in developing countries and requires the consideration of other rationalities, in addition to the economic one, for DM.

The impact of genital warts: loss of quality of life and cost of treatment in eight sexual health clinics in the UK

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the loss of quality of life and cost of treatment associated with genital warts seen in sexual health clinics.

METHODS

A cross-sectional questionnaire study and case note review of individuals with genital warts, carried out in eight sexual health clinics in England and Northern Ireland. Individuals with genital warts attending the participating clinics were invited to take part in the questionnaire study. 895 participants were recruited. A separate sample of 370 participants who had attended a participating clinic with a first visit for a first or recurrent episode of genital warts between April and June 2007 was included in the case note review. Quality of life was measured using the EQ-5D questionnaire and the cost of an episode of care was derived from the case note review.

RESULTS

The weighted mean EQ-5D index score was 0.87 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.89). The weighted mean disutility was 0.056 (95% CI 0.038 to 0.074). The estimated mean loss of quality-adjusted life-years associated with an episode of genital warts was 0.018 (95% CI 0.0079 to 0.031), equivalent to 6.6 days of healthy life lost per episode. The weighted mean cost per episode of care was £94 (95% CI £84 to £104), not including the cost of a sexually transmitted infection screen.

CONCLUSIONS

Genital warts have a substantial impact on the health service and the individual. This information can be utilised for economic evaluation of human papillomavirus vaccination.

Diabetes and genital warts: an unhappy coalition

Through clinical practice, it is often perceived that patients with diabetes are more likely to suffer from severe and recalcitrant warts. This study was set up to investigate if genital warts were more common in patients with diabetes and to determine if patients with diabetes and genital warts required more treatment than those without diabetes. Only female patients with diabetes and genital warts were investigated and were compared to the non-diabetic population. Results suggested that patients with diabetes had more extensive warts and recurrences. This study will hopefully further inform the debate surrounding preferential use of quadrivalent human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine as opposed to bivalent HPV vaccine especially in the setting of a Diabetes Young Person's clinic.

Recurrent respiratory papillomatosis: an uncommon but potentially devastating effect of human papillomavirus in children

Human papillomavirus (HPV) causes disease not only in the genital tract, but also in the larynx. Within the larynx HPV 6/11 causes recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP). RRP is relatively uncommon, yet it is devastating for the patient who requires many surgical procedures over years to control it. The cost of HPV-related genital tract disease is thought to be around £31 million per annum, whereas RRP costs in the region of £4 million annually despite RRP being comparatively rare. The HPV vaccination programme has brought great hope, although it is unfortunate that the current UK programme only targets high-risk HPV. Targeting both low- and high-risk HPV would have had additional benefits for the UK.