Do productivity costs matter?: the impact of including productivity costs on the incremental costs of interventions targeted at depressive disorders

Routine measurement in low back pain; towards a pragmatic patient-reported productivity cost outcome measurement using the institute for medical technology assessment productivity cost questionnaire

PURPOSE

The iMTA productivity cost questionnaire (iPCQ) has been recommended as a measurement tool for productivity cost, however, its use in routine care is hindered by the length of this questionnaire (18 questions). This study developed and tested a short-form (SF-) iPCQ.

METHOD

A secondary analysis of the Groningen Spine Cohort's baseline data from patients with low back pain referred for tertiary care was performed. Six SFs were evaluated against the comprehensive iPCQ. Spearman correlation (r), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC, agreement), standard error of measurement (SEM), and Bland-Altman's plot tested the congruence of the SFs with the comprehensive iPCQ.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 1220 patients with low back pain. The SF version with the highest correlation (SF-3; 7 items) with the comprehensive iPCQ had r = 0.99, ICC = 0.99, SEM = 295, while the SF with the least number of items (SF-6; 5 items) had r = 0.84, ICC = 0.91, SEM = 2063. The mean productivity cost estimates of SF-3 and SF-6 were €3414 (95% CI: 3036-3791) and €3333 (95% CI: 2970-3696) respectively while that for the comprehensive iPCQ amounted to €3456 (95% CI: 3189-3720).

CONCLUSION

A SF with seven questions was developed with a high agreement with the comprehensive iPCQ. Initial clinimetric testing was satisfactory. Further assessment is recommended.

Cost-effectiveness of a mindful yoga intervention added to treatment as usual for young women with major depressive disorder versus treatment as usual only: Cost-effectiveness of yoga for young women with depression

In a randomized controlled trial in the Netherlands, we studied the (cost)effectiveness of adding a mindful yoga intervention (MYI+TAU) to treatment as usual (TAU) for young women with major depressive disorder (MDD). In this paper, we present the results of the economic analyses. Societal costs and health outcomes were prospectively assessed during 15 months for all randomized participants (n = 171). Symptoms of depression (Depression Anxiety and Stress Scales; DASS) and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were used as health outcomes in the economic analyses. Mean total societal costs during the 15 months of the study were €11.966 for the MYI+TAU group and €13.818 for the TAU group, differences in mean total societal costs were not statistically significant. Health outcomes (DASS and QALY) were slightly in favour of MYI+TAU, but differences between groups were not statistically significant. Combining costs and health outcomes in cost-effectiveness analyses indicated that MYI+TAU is likely to be cost-effective compared to TAU which was confirmed by sensitivity analyses. Although there were limitations in the cost-effectiveness analysis, findings from this study suggest that MYI+TAU warrants future attention for the potential to be cost-effective compared to TAU for young women with MDD.

A novel set of Austrian reference unit costs for comprehensive societal perspectives consistent with latest European costing methods for economic evaluations

Decision making in public health often happens against the background of scarce resources. The systematic use of economic evaluations can be a main enabler in the alignment of public health goals with budgetary constraints. However, the lack of standardized methodology in terms of costing method and perspective are a critical barrier to the implementation of economic evaluations and the international comparability of results. We present a novel set of 22 reference unit costs (RUCs) optimized for cross-sectoral economic evaluations in Austria suitable for international comparability calculated using the standardized PECUNIA RUC Template. The common framework for costing and reporting, as well as the easy availability of the RUCs will reduce the burden on researchers and policy makers in future economic evaluations. The higher quality, accuracy, transparency and availability of economic evidence for policy design will help to improve the efficiency of public health-relevant healthcare decisions and make it easier for policy makers to bring funding arrangements and decision making across multiple sectors in line with Health-in-All-Policies goals.

Optimal age to stop prostate cancer screening and early detection

BACKGROUND

Prostate Cancer screening should be discontinued at older ages because competing mortality risks eventually dominate the risk of Prostate Cancer and harms exceed benefits. We explored the Prostate Cancer screening stopping age from the patient, healthcare system, and social perspectives in Iran.

METHODS

We applied Bellman Equations to formulate the net benefits biopsy and "do nothing". Using difference between the net benefits of two alternatives, we calculated the stopping age. The cancer states were without cancer, undetected cancer, detected cancer, metastatic cancer, and death. To move between states, we applied Markov property. Transition probabilities, rewards, and costs were inferred from the medical literature. The base-case scenario estimated the stopping age from the patient, healthcare system, and social perspectives. A one-way sensitivity used to find the most influential parameters on the stopping age.

RESULTS

Our results suggested that Prostate Cancer screening stopping ages from the patient, healthcare system, and social were 70, 68, and 68 respectively. The univariate sensitivity analysis showed that the stopping ages were sensitive to the disutility of treatment, discount factor, the disutility of metastasis, the annual probability of death from other causes, and the annual probability of developing metastasis from the hidden cancer state.

CONCLUSIONS

Men should not be screened for Prostate Cancer beyond 70 years old, as this results in the net benefit of "do nothing" above the biopsy. Nevertheless, this finding needs to be further studied with more detailed cancer progression models (considering re-biopsy, comorbidities, and more complicated states transition) and using local utility and willingness to pay value information.

Alteration of the α5 GABA receptor and 5HTT lead to cognitive deficits associated with major depressive-like behaviors in a 14-day combined stress rat model

INTRODUCTION

Current models used to study the pathophysiology of major depressive disorder (MDD) are laborious and time consuming. This study examined the effect of a 14-day combined stress model (CS; corticosterone injection and restraint stress) in male Sprague-Dawley rats and also compare the effect of CS versus 28-day corticosterone treatment on depressive-like behaviour and cognitive deficits.

MATERIEL AND METHODS

Depressive-like behaviours and cognitive deficits were assessed in the forced swim test (FST), sucrose preference (SPT), Morris water maze (MWM) and novel object recognition (NORT) tests. Real-time PCR and ELISA were respectively used to detect expression of the serotonin transporter (5-HTT), serotonin 1 A receptor (5-HT1A), α5 GABAA receptor, and the concentrations of corticosterone (plasma), GABA and acetylcholinesterase (AChE) in the hippocampus and Prefrontal cortex (PFC).Results CS group showed increased immobility time in the FST, time to reach the MWM platform, higher corticosterone level, and increased expressions of hippocampal and PFC 5-HT1A and α5 GABAA receptors, and AChE compared to their control groups. In contrast, reductions in SPT ratio, discrimination index in NORT, time in target quadrant, and hippocampal 5-HTT expression was noted relative to their control group. Compared to the 28-day corticosterone only group, PFC 5-HT1A, Hippocampal 5-HTT were reduced, while PFC 5-HTT, Hippocampal α5 GABAA receptors, and AChE concentrations were higher in the CS group.

CONCLUSION

Our CS model induced depressive-like behaviour with early cognitive deficits in rats affecting both hippocampus and PFC. The CS model may be useful in investigating new and comprehensive treatment strategies for MDD.

The effect of hepatitis C-associated premature deaths on labour productivity losses in Spain: a ten-year analysis

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection causes a substantial economic burden, not only in terms of healthcare costs, but also in labour productivity losses. The main objective of this study is to provide objective and comparable information about the trend in labour productivity losses caused by premature HCV-associated deaths in Spain in recent years (2009-2018). We used nationwide data from several official sources to create a simulation model based on the human capital approach and to estimate the flows in labour productivity losses due to deaths identified in the period considered. Based on a pessimistic scenario, the annual number of deaths due to HCV infections decreased by 19.7% between 2009 and 2018. The years of potential labour productive life lost (YPLPLL) decreased by 38.1%. That reduction led to a decrease in annual labour productivity losses from €236 million in 2009 to €156 million in 2018 (-33.8%). The aggregate HCV-related labour productivity losses between 2009 and 2018 ranged from €1742 million (optimistic scenario) to €1949 million (pessimistic scenario), with an intermediate estimation of €1846 million (moderately optimistic scenario). These results show a substantial reduction in annual deaths, working-age deaths, YPLPLL, and labour productivity losses associated with HCV infection over this period.

Production Losses due to Absenteeism and Presenteeism: The Influence of Compensation Mechanisms and Multiplier Effects

BACKGROUND

Productivity costs can form a large and influential component of total costs in an economic evaluation taking a societal perspective. In calculating productivity costs, estimating productivity losses is a central element. Compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects may influence these losses but remain understudied. Compensation mechanisms could reduce productivity losses while multiplier effects may increase them.

METHODS

Data on productivity losses were collected in 2015 using an online survey among a sample of persons aged 15-65 years in The Netherlands who worked at least 12 h per week and reported to have experienced absenteeism and/or presenteeism during the past 4 weeks. A total of 877 respondents completed the survey that contained questions on productivity losses, compensation mechanisms, and multiplier effects.

RESULTS

We found that 45.5% of the respondents reported absenteeism (average 6.5 days) during the past 4 weeks, losing on average 48.7 working hours, while presenteeism was experienced by 75.9% of respondents, with an average loss of 10.7 working hours. Compensation mechanisms were reported by 76.9% of respondents, compensating almost 80% of their lost production, while multiplier effects were reported by 23.6% of respondents, reducing the productivity of 4.2 colleagues by 27.8% on average, implying a multiplier of 2.1 in that subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights that compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects are common and may substantially affect production losses. Investigating these mechanisms and effects further, as well as their interactions, remains important. Translating these findings into productivity cost calculations in economic evaluations is not straightforward and requires attention, especially since compensation mechanisms may not be costless and, for multiplier effects, the value of hours of colleagues may not be similar to that of the person experiencing health problems.

Multiplier Effects and Compensation Mechanisms for Inclusion in Health Economic Evaluation: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects may affect productivity losses due to illness, disability, or premature death of individuals. Hence, they are important in estimating productivity losses and productivity costs in the context of economic evaluations of health interventions. This paper presents a systematic literature review of papers focusing on compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects, as well as whether and how they are included in health economic evaluations.

METHODS

The systematic literature search was performed covering EconLit and PubMed. A data-extraction form was developed focusing on compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects.

RESULTS

A total of 26 studies were included. Of these, 15 were empirical studies, three studies were methodological studies, two studies combined methodological research with empirical research, four were critical reviews, one study was a critical review combined with methodological research, and one study was a cost-benefit analysis. No uniform definition of compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects was identified. The terminology used to describe compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects varied as well. While the included studies suggest that both multipliers as well as compensation mechanisms substantially impact productivity cost estimates, the available evidence is scarce. Moreover, the generalizability as well as validity of assumptions underlying the calculations are unclear. Available measurement methods for compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects differ in approaches and are hardly validated.

CONCLUSION

While our review suggests that compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects may have a significant impact on productivity losses and costs, much remains unclear about their features, valid measurement, and correct valuation. This hampers their current inclusion in economic evaluation, and therefore, more research into both phenomena remains warranted.

Estimating Global Friction Periods for Economic Evaluation: A Case Study of Selected OECD Member Countries

BACKGROUND

The friction cost approach (FCA) offers an alternative to the dominant human capital approach to value productivity losses. Application of the FCA in practice is limited largely due to data availability. Recent attempts have tried to standardise the estimation of friction periods across Europe, but to date, this has not been attempted elsewhere. Our aim was to estimate friction periods for 17 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member countries between 2010 and 2021 based on routinely published data.

METHODS

We derived friction period estimates for Australia, Austria, Canada, Czechia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States. Vacancy stock and flow data was sourced from the OECD's short-term labour situation database from 2010 to 2021, and included the impact of Covid-19 on the labour market. The estimated friction periods were applied to cost cancer-related premature mortality for the United States as an illustrative case.

RESULTS

The average friction period in the five non-European countries (Australia, Canada, Korea, Japan and the United States) was 61.0 days (SD 9.4) (range between 44.8 days in Korea and 82.2 days in Canada) and the average friction period in the 12 European countries was 60.6 days (SD 14.8) (range between 34.1 days in Switzerland and 137.3 days in Czechia). In both cases, the outbreak of Covid-19 increased the length of the friction period. Our illustrative case revealed that productivity costs in the US were over a third lower using the study-specific friction period (56 days) compared with the conventionally assumed 90-day friction period applied in the literature as a default measure.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results expand the potential application of the FCA outside of Europe and will support greater utilisation of the FCA and wider inclusion of productivity costs in societal-based economic evaluations based on the use of widely available and updated key labour market variables in our selected countries.

Out-of-pocket Expenses and Time Spent on Clinic Visits Among HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Users and Other Clinic Attendees in Eswatini

User costs constitute a barrier to the uptake of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), but their magnitude appears rarely assessed. In this prospective observational study, we assessed self-reported out-of-pocket expenses (OOPE) and time spent on clinic visits during a PrEP demonstration project in Eswatini. At six public primary care clinics, 240 PrEP users and other clinic attendees were interviewed after a clinic visit. Among the 79.2% of clinic attendees reporting any medical OOPE (e.g., expenses for consultations or drugs) and/or non-medical OOPE (e.g., expenses for transport, food, or phone use), the median total OOPE was $1.36 (IQR 0.91-1.96). Non-medical OOPE occurred mostly due to transport expenses. The median travel time for a clinic visit was 1.0 h (IQR 0.67-2.0). The median time spent in the clinic was 2.0 h (IQR 1.15-3.0). The median opportunity cost of a clinic visit was $7.54 (IQR 5.42-11) when valuing time spent on a clinic visit with Eswatini's per-capita gross domestic product. Our findings can guide measures to reduce the user costs of PrEP in Eswatini and other contexts in which oral PrEP is provided through health care facilities.

The association between health costs and physical inactivity; analysis from the Physical Activity at Work study in Thailand

Introduction

Physical inactivity increases the risks of several common yet serious non-communicable diseases, costing a tremendous amount of health expenditure globally. This study aimed to estimate the association between health costs and physical inactivity in Thailand.

Methods

Data from the Physical Activity at Work cluster randomized controlled trial participants with valid objective physical activity data were extracted. Health costs were collected using the Health and Welfare Survey and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire and were categorized into past-month outpatient illness, past-year inpatient illness, and past-week presenteeism and absenteeism. Time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity was used to determine the activity level according to the current guideline (i.e., ≥150 minutes moderate-intensity or ≥75 minutes vigorous-intensity equivalent physical activity per week). The primary analysis evaluated the association between direct cost (treatment and travel costs) and societal cost (direct cost plus absenteeism due to the illness) of past-month outpatient illness and physical inactivity using a two-part model.

Results

In total, 277 participants with a mean age of 38.7 were included. Average direct and societal cost due to past-month outpatient illness were 146 THB (3.99 USD) (SD = 647 THB) and 457 THB (12.5 USD) (SD = 1390 THB), respectively. Compared to active participants, direct and societal cost of past-month outpatient illness were 153 THB (4.18 USD) (95%CI: -54.7 to 360 THB) and 426 THB (11.7 USD) (95%CI: 23.3 to 829 THB) higher in physically inactive individuals, respectively, adjusted for covariates. The additional societal cost of past-month outpatient illness was 145% higher in physically inactive participants compared to active participants. On the other hand, there was no significant association in direct and societal cost of past-year inpatient illness nor past-week indirect costs between physically active and non-active participants.

Discussion

Results were similar to recent findings in different countries. However, the findings should be generalized with caution due to the small sample size and potential bias from reverse causation. Future research is crucial for clarifying the health costs of physical inactivity in Thailand and other countries.

Family Spillover Effects: Are Economic Evaluations Misrepresenting the Value of Healthcare Interventions to Society?

The societal impacts of health interventions are seldom incorporated into health economic evaluations, including the impact that illness can have on informal or unpaid caregivers and other family members (i.e., "family spillover effects"). Previous research has demonstrated that by excluding family spillover effects, the value of health interventions may be underestimated on average. In this commentary, we discuss how the inclusion of spillover effects influences how we value interventions and, given the extent to which caregiver/family effects are largely not captured or known, propose ways in which these data could be more systematically collected or estimated and used by researchers. These recommendations include prioritizing data collection alongside clinical trials and patient registries, engaging expert opinion panels, and developing mapping algorithms for estimating caregiver/family utility values from non-preference-based caregiver health-related quality-of-life measures and/or from patient preference-based measures.

A systemmatic literature review on indirect costs of women with breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

The rising incidence of breast cancer places a financial burden on national health services and economies. The objective of this review is to present a detailed analysis of the research and literature on indirect costs of breast cancer.

METHODS

English literature databases from 2000 to 2020 were searched to find studies related to the objective of the present review. Study selection and data extraction was undertaken independently by two authors. Also, quality assessment was done using a checklist designed by Stunhldreher et al. RESULTS: The current study chose 33 studies that were eligible from a total of 2825 records obtained. The cost of lost productivity due to premature death based on human capital approach ranged from $22,386 to $52 billion. The cost burden from productivity lost due to premature death based on friction cost approach ranged from $1488.61 to $4,518,628.5. The cost burden from productivity lost due to morbidity with the human capital approach was reported as $126,857,360.69 to $596,659,071.28. The cost of lost productivity arising from informal caregivers with the human capital approach was $297,548.46 to $308 billion.

CONCLUSION

Evaluation of the existing evidence revealed the indirect costs of breast cancer in women to be significantly high. This study did a thorough review on the indirect costs associated with breast cancer in women which could serve as a guide to help pick the appropriate method for calculating the indirect costs of breast cancer based on existing methods, approach and data. There is a need for calculations to be standardised since the heterogeneity of results in different domains from various studies makes it impossible for comparisons to be made among different countries.

Systematic Literature Review of the Use of Productivity Losses/Gains in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Immune-Mediated Disorders

INTRODUCTION

In light of the lack of an agreed international standard for how to conduct cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs), including cost-utility analyses (CUAs) from a societal perspective, there is uncertainty regarding to what extent the inclusion of productivity losses/gains in economic evaluations can affect cost-effectiveness results and subsequently decisions on whether to recommend new health technologies. To investigate this, we conducted a systematic review of CEAs and CUAs of drug-based therapies for a set of chronic immune-mediated disorders to understand how cost elements and calculation methods related to productivity losses/gains are used, examine the impact on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of including productivity costs, and explore factors that affect the inclusion of productivity loss.

METHODS

Databases (MEDLINE® In-process, MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library) were searched from January 2010 to October 2020 by two independent reviewers for all CEAs and CUAs in adults with any of the following conditions: ankylosing spondylitis, chronic idiopathic urticaria, Crohn's disease, fibromyalgia, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus and ulcerative colitis. Relevant study data were extracted and evidence was synthesized for both qualitative and quantitative analysis. Productivity cost elements including absenteeism, presenteeism, unemployment/early retirement, premature mortality and informal care were extracted, along with the method used to determine them. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with the inclusion of productivity loss.

RESULTS

Our searches identified 5016 records, culminating in 198 unique studies from 234 publications following screening. Most of the studies investigated rheumatoid arthritis (37.0%) or psoriasis (32.0%). The majority were CUAs, with some including both a CEA and a CUA (73.0%). Most studies used a payer perspective only (28.5%) or a societal perspective only (21.0%). Of the 49 studies incorporating productivity losses/gains, 42 reported the type of cost element used; all of these used patient absenteeism, either alone or in addition with other elements. Only 16 studies reported the method used to value productivity changes, of which eight used a human capital approach, four used a friction cost approach and four used both approaches. Twenty-eight of the 49 studies (57.1%) reported inclusion of productivity losses/gains as contributing to more favourable cost-effectiveness outcomes and ICERs, while 12 (24.5%) reported no substantial impact. On the basis of a multivariate analysis, rheumatoid arthritis as the target disease had a statistically significant association with the inclusion of productivity loss compared with psoriasis and inflammatory bowel disease.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our review suggest that incorporating productivity cost elements may positively affect cost-effectiveness outcomes in evaluations of therapeutics for immune-mediated disorders. Our work highlights the continued need for clarity when reporting how CEAs and CUAs in this disease area are conducted, in order to better inform healthcare decision-making.

Cost-Effectiveness of Early Intervention in Psychosis: A Modeling Study

OBJECTIVE

Programs for early intervention in psychosis have shown clinical efficacy. The authors aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of early intervention programs compared with standard care for the treatment of first-episode psychosis in the United States.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model integrating published data on clinical efficacy, costs, and health utilities was developed to evaluate early intervention versus standard care over the lifetime of patients after their first psychotic episode. Model input data were derived from meta-analyses, clinical trials, and U.S. national data. The main outcomes included hospitalizations, employment rate, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime health care costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

RESULTS

Compared with patients receiving standard care, patients in the early intervention strategy had 3.2 fewer hospitalizations and 2.7 more years of employment over the course of their remaining life expectancy. From a health care perspective, early intervention had an ICER of approximately $51,600 per QALY. From a societal perspective, early intervention saved costs (i.e., yielded greater health benefits and had lower costs compared with standard care). Results were sensitive to the effect of early intervention on suicide, cost of standard care, cost of early intervention, and the effect (relative risk) of early intervention on employment. A scenario analysis that excluded the effect (i.e., hazard ratio) of early intervention on suicide yielded an ICER of approximately $197,000 per QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that it is economically beneficial to fund early intervention in psychosis programs in the United States. The findings indicate that early intervention in psychosis saves costs (from the societal perspective) and is cost-effective (health care sector perspective).

Economic evaluation of psychological treatments for common mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Common mental disorders (CMDs) constitute a major public health and economic burden on low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Systematic reviews of economic evaluations of psychological treatments for CMDs are limited. This systematic review examines methods, reports findings and appraises the quality of economic evaluations of psychological treatments for CMDs in LMICs. We searched a range of bibliographic databases (including PubMed, EconLit, APA-PsycINFO and Cochrane library) and the African Journals Online (AJoL) and Google Scholar platforms. We used a pre-populated template to extract data and the Drummond & Jefferson checklist for quality appraisal. We present results as a narrative synthesis. The review included 26 studies, mostly from Asia (12) and Africa (9). The majority were cost-effectiveness analyses (12), some were cost-utility analyses (5), with one cost-benefit analysis or combinations of economic evaluations (8). Most interventions were considered either cost-effective or potentially cost-effective (22), with 3 interventions being not cost-effective. Limitations were noted regarding appropriateness of conclusions drawn on cost-effectiveness, the use of cost-effectiveness thresholds and application of 'societal' incremental cost-effectiveness ratios to reflect value for money (VfM) of treatments. Non-specialist health workers (NSHWs) delivered most of the treatments (16) for low-cost delivery at scale, and costs should reflect the true opportunity cost of NSHWs' time to support the development of a sustainable cadre of health care providers. There is a 4-fold increase in economic evaluations of CMD psychological treatments in the last decade over the previous one. Yet, findings from this review highlight the need for better application of economic evaluation methodology to support resource allocation towards the World Health Organization recommended first-line treatments of CMDs. We suggest impact inventories to capture societal economic gains and propose a VfM assessment framework to guide researchers in evaluating cost-effectiveness.

Incorporating productivity loss in health economic evaluations: a review of guidelines and practices worldwide for research agenda in China

Introduction

Productivity loss may contribute to a large proportion of costs of health conditions in an economic evaluation from a societal perspective, but there is currently a lack of methodological consensus on how productivity loss should be measured and valued. Despite the research progress surrounding this issue in other countries, it has been rarely discussed in China.

Methods

We reviewed the official guidelines on economic evaluations in different countries and regions and screened the literature to summarise the extent to which productivity loss was incorporated in economic evaluations and the underlying methodological challenges.

Results

A total of 48 guidelines from 46 countries/regions were included. Although 32 (67%) guidelines recommend excluding productivity loss in the base case analysis, 23 (48%) guidelines recommend including productivity loss in the base case or additional analyses. Through a review of systematic reviews and the economic evaluation studies included in these reviews, we found that the average probability of incorporating productivity loss in an economic evaluation was 10.2%. Among the economic evaluations (n=478) that explicitly considered productivity loss, most (n=455) considered losses from paid work, while only a few studies (n=23) considered unpaid work losses. Recognising the existing methodological challenges and the specific context of China, we proposed a practical research agenda and a disease list for progress on this topic, including the development of the disease list comprehensively consisting of health conditions where the productivity loss should be incorporated into economic evaluations.

Conclusion

An increasing number of guidelines recommend the inclusion of productivity loss in the base case or additional analyses of economic evaluation. We optimistically expect that more Chinese researchers notice the importance of incorporating productivity loss in economic evaluations and anticipate guidelines that may be suitable for Chinese practitioners and decision-makers that facilitate the advancement of research on productivity loss measurement and valuation.

A Systematic Literature Review of Economic Evaluations and Cost Studies of the Treatment of Psoriasis, Atopic Dermatitis, and Chronic Urticaria

INTRODUCTION

Psoriasis (PSO), atopic dermatitis (AD), and chronic urticaria (CU) are common manifestations of immunological skin and subcutaneous conditions and have been shown to have a substantial impact on the quality of life of patients. The cost of treating those conditions can also be high, as the use of biologic treatments has become more common for moderate to severe patients. In this review, we examine characteristics of economic evaluations and cost studies conducted for the three conditions.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from January 1, 2016 to October 26, 2020 to identify economic evaluations where the cost of one or more drug treatment was evaluated and cost studies covering any intervention type. Each database was searched using keyword and MeSH terms related to treatment costs (e.g., health care cost, drug cost, etc.) and each condition (e.g., PSO, AD, eczema, CU, etc.).

RESULTS

A total of 123 studies were reviewed, including 104 studies (85%) of PSO (including psoriasis, plaque psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and psoriasis vulgaris), 14 studies (11%) of AD, and 5 studies (4%) of CU. Seventy-two studies (59%) reviewed reported the inclusion of biologic treatments, 10 studies (8%) did not include biologic treatments, and 41 studies (33%) did not report whether or not a biologic treatment was included. While nearly all studies (98%) included direct costs, only 22 studies (18%) included indirect costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Economic evaluations for AD and CU may be needed in order to better understand the value of new treatments. Moreover, a clearer delineation for biologic treatments and indirect costs (i.e., productivity losses and gains) may be required.

Pressure injuries in Australian public hospitals: A cost of illness study

BACKGROUND

Pressure injuries are a leading hospital adverse event, yet they are mostly preventable. Understanding their financial costs will help to appreciate the burden they place on the health system and assist in better planning and management of health expenditures to prevent pressure injuries.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost of pressure injuries in Australian public hospitals in 2020 demonstrating its economic burden in a well-resourced health system.

METHODS

A cost of illness study with a 12-month time horizon was conducted. Resource use for the treatment of pressure injuries and productivity loss due to pressure injuries were derived using a bottom-up approach. Parameters of the cost estimates were obtained from secondary sources and literature syntheses. A simulation with 10,000 draws was used to generate statistical properties of the cost estimates.

RESULTS

Based on a prevalence of 12.9%, the total cost of pressure injuries in Australian public hospitals was $9.11 billion [95% confidence intervals: 9.02, 9.21]. The two largest shares of costs were accounted for by the opportunity cost of excess length of stay of $3.60 billion [3.52, 3.68] and treatment costs of $3.59 billion [3.57, 3.60]. Productivity loss associated with pressure injuries amounts to $493 million [482, 504]. Hospital-acquired pressure injuries account for a total of $5.50 billion [5.44, 5.56], whereas pressure injuries present on admissions costed $3.71 billion [3.70, 3.72]. In terms of severity, Stage 2 pressure injuries contributed the most to total treatment costs, total excessive length of stay, and total loss of healthy life years. Australian society is willing to pay $1.43 billion [1.40, 1.45] to save 6,701 [6,595; 6,807] healthy life years lost by pressure injury.

CONCLUSIONS

Reducing preventable pressure injuries and stopping the progression of Stage 1 pressure injuries will likely result in an immense cost-saving for Australia and will likely have similar benefits for other countries with comparable profiles.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Australian public hospital study provides comprehensive analysis of the cost of pressure injury, including estimates of direct and indirect medical costs, and indirect non-medical costs - such as productivity and quality of life.

The economic burden of knee and hip osteoarthritis: absenteeism and costs in the Dutch workforce

Background

This study aimed to quantify the absenteeism costs of knee and hip osteoarthritis in the Netherlands for the Dutch workforce and specific groups of workers.

Methods

We used a longitudinal, dynamic database from a large occupational health service in which occupational physicians register information about personal information and sick leave of workers with the diagnosis of knee- and/or hip osteoarthritis. We included all employees aged 15 to 75 years performing paid work and diagnosed with knee and/or hip osteoarthritis. Costs were calculated annually and per episode for different subgroups from an employer’s perspective using the Human Capital Approach. In the Netherlands, the employer has to pay 70% of the employee's wage out of pocket for the first two years of sick leave and also for the occupational health care. In this way, employers receive information about the costs of workers on sick leave due to knee or hip osteoarthritis. This might stimulate investments in targeted prevention and work-directed care.

Results

For the period 2015–2017, 1399 workers fulfilled the inclusion criteria. An average sick leave episode of knee osteoarthritis had a duration of 186 calendar days and was associated with €15,550 in costs. For hip osteoarthritis these data were 159 calendar days and €12,482 in costs. These costs are particularly high among male workers and workers with a higher number of weekly working hours. The average annual costs for the Dutch workforce due to sick leave for knee and hip osteoarthritis were €26.9 million and €13.8 million, respectively. Sick leave costs decreased for hip and not for knee osteoarthritis during 2015–2017.

Conclusions

Annual sick leave costs due to knee and hip osteoarthritis are about €40 million for the Dutch workforce and approximately twice as high for knee compared to hip osteoarthritis. Average costs per sick leave episode are particularly high among male workers and workers with a higher number of weekly working hours.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-022-05306-9.

Acceptability, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of blended cognitive-behavioural therapy (bCBT) versus face-to-face CBT (ftfCBT) for anxiety disorders in specialised mental health care: A 15-week randomised controlled trial with 1-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Anxiety disorders are highly prevalent and cause substantial economic burden. Blended cognitive-behavioural therapy (bCBT), which integrates Internet-based CBT and face-to-face CBT (ftfCBT), is an attractive and potentially cost-saving treatment alternative to conventional CBT for patients with anxiety disorders in specialised mental health care. However, little is known about the effectiveness of bCBT in routine care. We examined the acceptability, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bCBT versus ftfCBT in outpatient specialised care to patients with panic disorder, social anxiety disorder and generalised anxiety disorder.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Patients with anxiety disorders were randomised to bCBT (n = 52) or ftfCBT (n = 62). Acceptability of bCBT and ftfCBT were evaluated by assessing treatment preference, adherence, satisfaction and therapeutic alliance. Costs and effects were assessed at post-treatment and one-year follow-up. Primary outcome measure was the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). Secondary outcomes were depressive symptoms, general psychopathology, work and social adjustment, quality of life and mastery. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were computed from societal and healthcare perspectives by calculating the incremental costs per incremental quality-adjusted life year (QALY). No significant differences between bCBT and ftfCBT were found on acceptability or effectiveness measures at post-treatment (Cohen's d between-group effect size on BAI = 0.15, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.60) or at one-year follow-up (d = -0.38, 95% CI -0.84 to 0.09). The modelled point estimates of societal costs (bCBT €10945, ftfCBT €10937) were higher and modelled point estimates of direct medical costs (bCBT €3748, ftfCBT €3841) were lower in bCBT. The acceptability curves showed that bCBT was expected to be a cost-effective intervention. Results should be carefully interpreted due to the small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

bCBT appears an acceptable, clinically effective and potentially cost-saving alternative option for treating patients with anxiety disorders. Trials with larger samples are needed to further investigate cost-effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register: NTR4912.

Measurement Instruments of Productivity Loss of Paid and Unpaid Work: A Systematic Review and Assessment of Suitability for Health Economic Evaluations From a Societal Perspective

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed (1) to perform a systematic literature review of instruments for measuring productivity loss of paid and unpaid work and (2) to assess the suitability (in terms of identification, measurement, and valuation) of these instruments for use in health economic evaluations from a societal perspective.

METHODS

Articles published from 2018 were sourced from PubMed/Medline, PsycInfo, Embase, and Econlit. Using 2 separate search strategies, eligible economic evaluations and validation studies were selected and unique measurement instruments identified. A data-extraction form was developed by studying previous literature and consulting an international panel of experts in the field of productivity costs. This data-extraction form was applied to assess the suitability of instruments for use in economic evaluations.

RESULTS

A total of 5982 articles were retrieved from the databases, of which 99 economic evaluations and 9 validation studies were included in the review. A total of 42 unique measurement instruments were identified. Nine instruments provided quantified measures of absenteeism, presenteeism, and unpaid work. Five instruments supplied the necessary information to enable the use of at least 1 common valuation method. The Health and Labour Questionnaire-Short Form, Health and Labour Questionnaire, and Institute for Medical Technology Assessment Productivity Cost Questionnaire met both criteria. Nevertheless, the developers replaced the Health and Labour Questionnaire-Short Form and Health and Labour Questionnaire by the more recently developed Institute for Medical Technology Assessment Productivity Cost Questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

Although many instruments for measuring productivity loss were identified, most were not suitable for capturing productivity changes for economic evaluations from a societal perspective. Future research can benefit from this study by making an informed instrument choice for the measurement of productivity loss of paid and unpaid work.

Patient, family and productivity costs of end-stage renal disease in the Netherlands; exposing non-healthcare related costs

Background

Healthcare costs related to ESRD are well-described, but broader societal costs of ESRD are less known. This study aimed to estimate patient and family costs, including informal care costs and out-of-pocket costs, and costs due to productivity loss related to ESRD, for patients receiving dialysis and living with a kidney transplant, using a bottom-up approach.

Methods

A total of 655 patients were asked to complete a digital questionnaire consisting of two standardised instruments (iMCQ and iPCQ) from November 2016 through January 2017. We applied a retrospective bottom-up cost estimation by combining data from the questionnaire with unit prices from the Dutch costing manual.

Results

Our study sample consisted of 230 patients, of which 165 were kidney transplant recipients and 65 received dialysis. The total annual non-healthcare related costs were estimated at €8284 (SD: €14,266) for transplant recipients and €23,488 (SD: €39,434) for dialysis patients. Costs due to productivity loss contributed most to the total non-healthcare costs (66% for transplant recipients and 65% for dialysis patients), followed by informal care costs (26% resp. 29%) and out-of-pocket costs, such as medication and travel expenses (8% resp. 6%).

Conclusion

By exposing patient, family and productivity costs, our study revealed that dialysis and transplantation are not only costly within the healthcare system, but also incur high non-healthcare costs (18–23% resp. 35% of the total societal costs). It is important to reveal these types of non-healthcare costs in order to understand the full burden of ESRD for society and the potential impact of new therapies.

Predicting presenteeism using measures of health status

Objectives

To identify whether it is feasible to develop a mapping algorithm to predict presenteeism using multiattribute measures of health status.

Methods

Data were collected using a bespoke online survey in a purposive sample (n = 472) of working individuals with a self-reported diagnosis of Rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Survey respondents were recruited using an online panel company (ResearchNow). This study used data captured using two multiattribute measures of health status (EQ5D-5 level; SF6D) and a measure of presenteeism (WPAI, Work Productivity Activity Index). Statistical correlation between the WPAI and the two measures of health status (EQ5D-5 level; SF6D) was assessed using Spearman’s rank correlation. Five regression models were estimated to quantify the relationship between WPAI and predict presenteeism using health status. The models were specified based in index and domain scores and included covariates (age; gender). Estimated and observed presenteeism were compared using tenfold cross-validation and evaluated using Root mean square error (RMSE).

Results

A strong and negative correlation was found between WPAI and: EQ5D-5 level and WPAI (r = − 0.64); SF6D (r =− 0.60). Two models, using ordinary least squares regression were identified as the best performing models specifying health status using: SF6D domains with age interacted with gender (RMSE = 1.7858); EQ5D-5 Level domains and age interacted with gender (RMSE = 1.7859).

Conclusions

This study provides indicative evidence that two existing measures of health status (SF6D and EQ5D-5L) have a quantifiable relationship with a measure of presenteeism (WPAI) for an exemplar application of working individuals with RA. A future study should assess the external validity of the proposed mapping algorithms.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11136-021-02936-9.

The Excess Costs of Depression and the Influence of Sociodemographic and Socioeconomic Factors: Results from the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults (DEGS)

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to estimate excess costs of depression in Germany and to examine the influence of sociodemographic and socioeconomic determinants.

METHODS

Annual excess costs of depression per patient were estimated for the year 2019 by comparing survey data of individuals with and without self-reported medically diagnosed depression, representative for the German population aged 18-79 years. Differences between individuals with depression (n = 223) and without depression (n = 4540) were adjusted using entropy balancing. Excess costs were estimated using generalized linear model regression with a gamma distribution and log-link function. We estimated direct (inpatient, outpatient, medication) and indirect (sick leave, early retirement) excess costs. Subgroup analyses by social determinants were conducted for sex, age, socioeconomic status, first-generation or second-generation migrants, partnership, and social support.

RESULTS

Total annual excess costs of depression amounted to €5047 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3214-6880) per patient. Indirect excess costs amounted to €2835 (1566-4103) and were higher than direct excess costs (€2212 [1083-3341]). Outpatient (€498), inpatient (€1345), early retirement (€1686), and sick leave (€1149) excess costs were statistically significant, while medication (€370) excess costs were not. Regarding social determinants, total excess costs were highest in the younger age groups (€7955 for 18-29-year-olds, €9560 for 30-44-year-olds), whereas total excess costs were lowest for the oldest age group (€2168 for 65+) and first-generation or second-generation migrants (€1820).

CONCLUSIONS

Depression was associated with high excess costs that varied by social determinants. Considerable differences between the socioeconomic and sociodemographic subgroups need further clarification as they point to specific treatment barriers as well as varying treatment needs.

The broader societal impacts of COVID-19 and the growing importance of capturing these in health economic analyses

AbstractThe rapid spread of the current COVID-19 pandemic has affected societies worldwide, leading to excess mortality, long-lasting health consequences, strained healthcare systems, and additional strains and spillover effects on other sectors outside health (i.e., intersectoral costs and benefits). In this perspective piece, we demonstrate the broader societal impacts of COVID-19 on other sectors outside the health sector and the growing importance of capturing these in health economic analyses. These broader impacts include, for instance, the effects on the labor market and productivity, education, criminal justice, housing, consumption, and environment. The current pandemic highlights the importance of adopting a societal perspective to consider these broader impacts of public health issues and interventions and only omit these where it can be clearly justified as appropriate to do so. Furthermore, we explain how the COVID-19 pandemic exposed and exacerbated existing deep-rooted structural inequalities that contribute to the wider societal impacts of the pandemic.

Productivity loss/gain in cost-effectiveness analyses for vaccines: a systematic review

Introduction: The kinds of costs included in cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) for vaccines, such as direct medical costs and indirect costs, may affect their outcomes. While some guidelines recommend inclusion of costs associated with productivity losses/gains, very little guidance is provided about the productivity elements to include and their calculation approach.Areas covered: We conducted a systematic review of CEAs for vaccines and vaccine programs published between 1 January 2010 and 19 November 2019 that included productivity costs using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. The kind of productivity elements included their calculation approach, and the impact of their inclusion on cost-effectiveness are summarized. Among 88 studies identified, productivity elements included were reported for 71 studies (81%) with absenteeism being the most commonly included element. Only 24 studies (27%) reported the approach used to calculate productivity costs (human capital vs. friction approach). Most studies (81%) reported a more favorable cost-effectiveness with the inclusion of productivity losses/gains.Expert opinion: Inclusion of productivity losses/gains for CEAs for vaccines has resulted in more favorable cost-effectiveness based on the studies reviewed. However, clearer guidance on the productivity elements to include by disease area and more transparency on the calculation method used may be needed.

Economic evaluations of psychological treatments for common mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries: protocol for a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Common mental disorders (CMDs) are highly prevalent conditions that constitute a major public health and economic burden on society in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Despite the increased demand for economic evidence to support resource allocation for scaled-up implementation of mental health services in these contexts, economic evaluations of psychological treatments for CMDs remain scarce.

OBJECTIVE

The proposed systematic review aims to synthesize findings on methods and outcomes of economic evaluations of psychological treatments for CMDs in LMICs and appraise quality.

METHODS

We will identify, select, and extract data from published economic evaluations of psychological interventions for CMDs conducted in LMICs. We will search bibliographic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, EconLit, PsycINFO, Africa-Wide Information, Cochrane library, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), Cost Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) Registry), and the African Journals Online (AJOL) and Google Scholar platforms. Only full economic evaluations (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA), Cost-Utility Analysis (CUA), Cost-Consequence Analysis (CCA), or Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA)) of psychological treatments for CMDs (defined as depressive, anxiety, and substance use disorders) conducted in LMICs will be included. There will be no restrictions based on date of publication, perspective, follow-up duration or sample size. Data extraction will be guided by the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.

RESULTS

The results presented will be examined using a narrative synthesis approach. The quality of included studies will be assessed using the Drummond & Jefferson checklist.

CONCLUSION

The fledgling evidence base in this area provides an opportunity to promote improved economic evaluation methods in line with repeated calls for economic evidence alongside effectiveness evidence in these settings. A rigorously developed economic evaluation evidence base will support resource allocation decisions for scaled up implementation of psychological interventions in LMIC settings.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020185277.

Use of Productivity Loss/Gain in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses for Drugs: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Inclusion of productivity losses and gains in cost-effectiveness analyses for drugs is recommended by pharmacoeconomic guidelines in some countries and is considered optional in others. Often guidelines recommend analysis based on the payer perspective, but suggest that a supplemental analysis based on the societal perspective may be submitted that includes productivity losses/gains. However, there is no universally recognized framework for the approach to including productivity losses and gains in pharmacoeconomic analyses.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to systematically review literature on cost-effectiveness analyses of drug interventions that included costs associated with productivity losses/gains and to summarize the types cost elements included and cost calculation methods employed. Moreover, this study examines variations in the calculation of productivity losses/gains by target disease type, geographic region, income group, period of analysis, and analysis time horizon-as well as the impact of their inclusion on the study outcomes.

METHODS

A search of three databases was performed, including MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, to identify cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses that included indirect costs such as productivity losses/gains. Publications from January 2010 to October 2019 were examined and selected for inclusion by two independent reviewers. In addition to the citation details, data on the country of analysis, country income group, target disease area, study sponsorship, type of analysis, study design, time horizon, analysis perspective, productivity loss/gain elements included, the approach used to estimate productivity losses/gains, and the impact of their inclusion on the study outcome-namely the incremental cost effectiveness ratio-were extracted and summarized.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 5038 unique studies, and 208 were included in the final analysis. Among the studies reviewed, 165 (79%) were conducted in high-income countries and 160 (77%) were conducted for North American and European/Central Asian countries. The productivity loss/gain elements included in the analysis were reported for 169 studies (81%). Absenteeism only was included for 98 studies (47%), and absenteeism plus presenteeism was included for 29 studies (14%). Absenteeism plus some other element such as costs associated with unemployment and/or early retirement was included for 32 studies (15%) examined. Only one out of four of the studies reviewed included information on the approach used to estimate productivity losses/gains, which was predominantly the human capital approach. One-hundred forty-four studies (69%) reported the impact of including productivity losses/gains on the ICER, with 110 studies (53%) reporting that their inclusion contributed to more favorable cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Although inclusion of productivity losses/gains was shown to have a favorable impact on evaluations for many studies, their impact and method of calculation was often not reported or was unclear. Further examination and discussion is needed to consider the optimal framework for considering productivity losses/gains in cost-effectiveness analyses, including the appropriate cost elements to include (e.g., patient absenteeism, caregiver absenteeism, presenteeism, unemployment, etc.) and how those costs should be estimated.

Advances in the methodological approach to friction period estimation: A European perspective

The friction cost approach (FCA) estimates the productivity costs of disease from an employer's perspective but the lack of estimates of friction periods in different countries limits its use. Our aim was to use labour market aggregates to generate two alternative estimates of the friction period for European countries and to apply the FCA to illustrate the impact on cancer-related lost productivity costs. We included thirty countries (EU 27 + the United Kingdom, Switzerland and Norway). Base-case Method 1BC used annual Dutch vacancy stock and flow data (2001-2019) to estimate friction periods for this country. A regression model was employed using Dutch data and country-specific vacancy and unemployment rates to generate country-specific friction period estimates for the other 29 countries. Alternative Method 2ALT used country-specific newly occupied jobs as a proxy vacancy flow variable and vacancy stock data to generate friction period estimates. These were applied, within the FCA, to premature cancer mortality data (from GLOBOCAN2018) for all cancers combined for Western European countries. Costs are in €2018. Method 1BC estimated friction periods in 2018 ranged from 70.8 days for Greece to 145.9 days for the Czech Republic, with a mean duration of 95.3 days. Method 2ALT produced a mean friction period of 80.0 days. On average, across countries, Method 2ALT friction periods were 15.4 days (-18.5%) shorter than Method 1BC estimates. Friction period estimates over the last decade were shorter than those for 2018 reflecting lower vacancy rates. Total cancer premature mortality costs according to FCA Method 1BC amounted to €1.0 billion in 2018 for Western Europe compared to €0.99 billion for Method 2ALT. We developed two alternative - and viable - methods to estimate country-specific friction periods. These approaches will enable researchers to apply the FCA to estimate the productivity cost of diseases across Europe from an employer's perspective.

Perspective and Costing in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis, 1974-2018

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to examine perspective and costing approaches used in cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) and the distribution of reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

METHODS

We analyzed the Tufts Medical Center's CEA and Global Health CEA registries, containing 6907 cost-per-quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) and 698 cost-per-disability-adjusted-life-year (DALY) studies published through 2018. We examined how often published CEAs included non-health consequences and their impact on ICERs. We also reviewed 45 country-specific guidelines to examine recommended analytic perspectives.

RESULTS

Study authors often mis-specified or did not clearly state the perspective used. After re-classification by registry reviewers, a healthcare sector or payer perspective was most prevalent (74%). CEAs rarely included unrelated medical costs and impacts on non-healthcare sectors. The most common non-health consequence included was productivity loss in the cost-per-QALY studies (12%) and patient transportation in the cost-per-DALY studies (21%). Of 19,946 cost-per-QALY ratios, the median ICER was $US26,000/QALY (interquartile range [IQR] 2900-110,000), and 18% were cost saving and QALY increasing. Of 5572 cost-per-DALY ratios, the median ICER was $US430/DALY (IQR 67-3400), and 8% were cost saving and DALY averting. Based on 16 cost-per-QALY studies (2017-2018) reporting 68 ICERs from both the healthcare sector and societal perspectives, the median ICER from a societal perspective ($US22,710/QALY [IQR 11,991-49,603]) was more favorable than from a healthcare sector perspective ($US30,402/QALY [IQR 10,486-77,179]). Most governmental guidelines (67%) recommended either a healthcare sector or a payer perspective.

CONCLUSION

Researchers should justify and be transparent about their choice of perspective and costing approaches. The use of the impact inventory and reporting of disaggregate outcomes can reduce inconsistencies and confusion.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of using the heat and moisture exchangers compared with alternative stoma covers in laryngectomy rehabilitation: US perspective

BACKGROUND

This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of using heat and moisture exchangers (HMEs) vs alternative stoma covers (ASCs) following laryngectomy in the United States.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis were conducted including uncertainty analyses using real-world survey data with pulmonary events and productivity loss.

RESULTS

HME use was more effective and less costly compared with ASCs. Quality-adjusted life years were slightly higher for HME-users. Total costs per patient (lifetime) were $59 362 (HME) and $102 416 (ASC). Pulmonary events and productivity loss occurred more frequently in the ASC-users. Annual budget savings were up to $40 183 593. Costs per pulmonary event averted were $3770.

CONCLUSIONS

HME utilization in laryngectomy patients was cost-effective. Reimbursement of HME devices is thus recommended. Utilities may be underestimated due to the generic utility instrument used and sample size. Therefore, we recommend development of a disease-specific utility tool to incorporate in future analyses.

Exploring the identification, validation, and categorization of the cost and benefits of criminal justice in mental health: the PECUNIA project

BACKGROUND

Mental health disorders and their treatments produce significant costs and benefits in both healthcare and non-healthcare sectors. The latter are often referred to as intersectoral costs and benefits (ICBs). Little is known about healthcare-related ICBs in the criminal justice sector and how to include these in health economics research.

OBJECTIVES

The triple aim of this study is (i) to identify healthcare-related ICBs in the criminal justice sector, (ii) to validate the list of healthcare-related ICBs in the criminal justice sector on a European level by sector-specific experts, and (iii) to classify the identified ICBs.

METHODS

A scientific literature search in PubMed and an additional grey literature search, carried out in six European countries, were used to retrieve ICBs. In order to validate the international applicability of the ICBs, a survey was conducted with an international group of experts from the criminal justice sector. The list of criminal justice ICBs was categorized according to the PECUNIA conceptual framework.

RESULTS

The full-text analysis of forty-five peer-reviewed journal articles and eleven grey literature sources resulted in a draft list of items. Input from the expert survey resulted in a final list of fourteen unique criminal justice ICBs, categorized according to the care atom.

CONCLUSION

This study laid further foundations for the inclusion of important societal costs of mental health-related interventions within the criminal justice sector. More research is needed to facilitate the further and increased inclusion of ICBs in health economics research.

Using qualitative methods for a conceptual analysis of measures of health status and presenteeism prior to a mapping study

OBJECTIVES

The inclusion of productivity in economic evaluations is a contentious issue. Methods are currently being developed to assess how it may feasibly be included for specific interventions, such as workplace interventions (WPIs), where productivity is a key outcome. Mapping (also called cross-walking or prediction modelling) may offer a solution. Prior to producing a mapping algorithm, it is recommended that the conceptual validity between 'source' and 'target' measures be understood first. This study aimed to understand the conceptual validity of two existing measures of health status (EQ-5D; SF-6D) and presenteeism to inform the potential for a subsequent mapping algorithm.

METHODS

A purposive sample of individuals who were currently working and had either rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Individuals were recruited through support groups. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted until data saturation (no new emerging themes) was reached. Deductive and inductive framework analysis methods were used to identify key aspects of the conditions (themes) that impact on presenteeism (working at reduced levels of health).

RESULTS

Twenty-two (RA = 10; AS = 9; PsA = 3) employed individuals were interviewed. Deductive analysis identified evidence which confirmed the domains included in the EQ-5D and SF-6D capture those key aspects of RA, AS and PsA that increase presenteeism. Inductive analysis identified an additional theme; mental clarity, not captured by the EQ-5D or SF-6D, was also found to have a direct impact on presenteeism.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the study indicate conceptual validity of both health status measures to predict presenteeism. The next step is to develop a mapping algorithm for presenteeism.

Variation in the methodological approach to productivity cost valuation: the case of prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Standardised integration of productivity costs into health economic evaluations is hindered by equity and distributional concerns. Our aim was to explore the distributive impact of productivity cost methodological variation, describing the consequences for different groups.

METHODS

527 prostate cancer survivors (2-5 years post-diagnosis) completed questions on work patterns since diagnosis. Productivity loss, categorised into temporary/permanent absenteeism, reduced hours and presenteeism, were costed in €2012. Valuation approaches included the human capital approach (HCA) and the friction cost approach (FCA), with wage multipliers (WM) applied in additional analyses. Both national and self-reported wages were used. Costs were compared across socio-demographic and economic characteristics using non-parametric tests.

RESULTS

The estimated base case (HCA, using national wages) total productivity cost was €44,201 per prostate cancer survivor. Permanent absenteeism accounted for the largest cost (€18,537), followed by reduced work hours (€11,130), presenteeism (€8148) and temporary absenteeism (€6386). Alternative valuation estimates ranged from - 90% (FCA_{national wage}: €4625) to + 82% (HCAWM_{self-reported wage}: €80,485) compared to the base case and were consistently higher for self-reported wages compared to national wages. Statistically significant differences in productivity cost were found across four of the six survivor socio-demographic and economic characteristics by valuation approach, despite no significant difference in their physical unit equivalents.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that the distributional impact of productivity costs varies by socio-economic and demographic characteristics. We advocate that: productivity loss should be reported in physical units where possible; cost estimation should be subject to sensitivity analysis, and only where this is not feasible, that the HCA and national wages be used to value productivity loss where equity concerns are paramount.

Burden of smoking in Brazil and potential benefit of increasing taxes on cigarettes for the economy and for reducing morbidity and mortality

The prevalence of smoking in Brazil has decreased considerably in recent decades, but the country still has a high burden of disease associated with this risk factor. The study aimed to estimate the burden of mortality, morbidity, and costs for society associated with smoking in 2015 and the potential impact on health outcomes and the economy based on price increases for cigarettes through taxes. Two models were developed: the first is a mathematical model based on a probabilistic microsimulation of thousands of individuals using hypothetical cohorts that considered the natural history, costs, and quality of life of these individuals. The second is a tax model applied to estimate the economic benefit and health outcomes in different price increase scenarios in 10 years. Smoking was responsible for 156,337 deaths, 4.2 million years of potential life lost, 229,071 acute myocardial infarctions, 59,509 strokes, and 77,500 cancer diagnoses. The total cost was BRL 56.9 billion (USD 14.7 billion), with 70% corresponding to the direct cost associated with healthcare and the rest to indirect cost due to lost productivity from premature death and disability. A 50% increase in cigarette prices would avoid 136,482 deaths, 507,451 cases of cardiovascular diseases, 64,382 cases of cancer, and 100,365 cases of stroke. The estimated economic benefit would be BRL 97.9 billion (USD 25.5 billion). In conclusion, the burden of disease and economic losses associated with smoking is high in Brazil, and tax increases are capable of averting deaths, illness, and costs to society.

Estimated annual and lifetime labor productivity in the United States, 2016: implications for economic evaluations

Background: Human-capital based lifetime productivity estimates are frequently used in cost-of-illness (COI) analyses and, less commonly, in cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs). Previous US estimates assumed that labor productivity and real earnings both grow by 1% per year. Objectives: This study presents estimates of annual and lifetime productivity for 2016 using data from the American Community Survey, the American Time Use Survey, and the Current Population Survey, and with varying assumptions about real earnings growth. Methods: The sum of market productivity (gross annual personal labor earnings adjusted for employer-paid benefits) and the imputed value of non-market time spent in household, caring, and volunteer services was estimated. The present value of lifetime productivity at various ages was calculated for synthetic cohorts using annual productivity estimates, life tables, discount rates, and assumptions about future earnings growth rates. Results: Mean annual productivity was $57,324 for US adults in 2016, including $36,935 in market and $20,389 in non-market productivity. Lifetime productivity at birth, using a 3% discount rate, is roughly $1.5 million if earnings grow by 1% per year and $1.2 million if future earnings growth averages 0.5% per year. Conclusions: Inclusion of avoidable productivity losses in societal-perspective CEAs of health interventions is recommended in new US cost-effectiveness guidelines. However, estimates vary depending on whether analysts choose to estimate total productivity or just market productivity, and on assumptions made about growth in future productivity and earnings.

Beyond the clinical impact of aortic and pulmonary valve implantation: health-related quality of life, informal care and productivity†

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to provide estimates of patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL), use of informal care and productivity in patients after surgical aortic and pulmonary valve replacement and transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

METHODS

Consecutive cohorts of 1239 adult patients who had surgical aortic valve replacement or surgical pulmonary valve replacement and 433 patients who had transcatheter aortic valve implantation at 2 Dutch heart centres were cross-sectionally surveyed at a median time of 2.9 and 3.2 years after the intervention, respectively. The survey included questions on HRQoL (EQ-5D-5L and SF-12-v2), use of informal care and productivity in paid and unpaid work. All outcomes were compared with age and sex-matched individuals from the general population.

RESULTS

The response rate was 56% (n = 687) of patients who had surgical valve replacement and 59% (n = 257) of those who had transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Compared with the general population, patients reported poorer HRQoL on physical health domains, whereas their scores were comparable for mental health domains. After a heart valve implantation, patients reported using informal care more frequently than the general population, but labour participation was comparable. Patients with late complications [antibiotic treatment for endocarditis (n = 4), stroke (n = 11), transient ischaemic attack (n = 15)] reported lower HRQoL, greater use of informal care and greater productivity loss than patients without complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who had aortic and pulmonary valve implantations experience relatively mild limitations in daily life compared to the general population. The consequences of a heart valve implantations beyond clinical outcomes should be considered to create realistic patient expectations of life after a heart valve implantation and unbiased resource allocation decisions at national levels.

Costs of administration, travelling, and productivity losses associated with hospital administration of multiple myeloma drugs in Finland

AIM

To estimate the drug administration, travelling, and productivity costs associated with infusion or subcutaneous proteasome inhibitor (PI) treatments (specifically carfilzomib and bortezomib) for multiple myeloma (MM) patients in Finland.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Price tariffs of Finnish hospital districts are used as the basis of invoicing sent to healthcare service payers. A review of these price tariff lists was conducted and obtained data analysed to estimate the mean unit cost of PI administration visit. Travelling costs stratified by areas with different population densities were assessed, based on the national travelling reimbursement register data maintained by the Social Insurance Institution of Finland. Productivity costs due to time spent on administration visits and travelling were estimated based on an expert interview and a spatial healthcare accessibility analysis.

RESULTS

Nineteen (95%) of the Finnish hospital districts were included in the review. Relevant unit cost information was found for 15 (75%) of the districts. The mean PI administration cost alone was 270€ (95% CI = 189€-351€) per administration and increased to 371€ when travelling costs were included. Productivity costs added, the mean PI administration costs totalled 405€ for bortezomib and 437€ for carfilzomib.

LIMITATIONS

The costing rationale of price tariffs may vary between hospital districts. Productivity costs were estimated conservatively, due to lack of data.

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of intravenous or subcutaneous PIs to treat MM in healthcare facilities causes significant and potentially avoidable healthcare, travelling, and indirect costs, and they should be included in all health economic evaluations (HEEs). As the cost estimates utilized in this study represent most of central hospitals in the country, they provide useful information for future HEEs. A broader conclusion is that novel oral medications, such as the first oral PI, have a significant potential for reducing administration-related costs of subcutaneous or intravenous PIs.

Affecting patients with work-related problems by educational training of their GPs: a cost-effectiveness study

Background

Assessing the cost effectiveness of training aimed at increasing general practitioners’ (GP) work awareness and patients’ work-related self-efficacy and quality of life.

Methods

A cluster randomized controlled trial in twenty-six GP practices in the southeast of the Netherlands with 32 participating GPs. GPs working in an intervention group practice received training and GPs working in a control group practice delivered usual care. The training intervention consisted of lectures and workshops aimed at increasing GPs’ work awareness and more proactive counseling for patients with work-related problems (WRP). Subjects were working age patients with paid work for at least 12 h per week, who visited one of the participating GPs during the study period. As outcome measures we used the Return to Work Self Efficacy scale to assess patients’ work-related self-efficacy and the Euroquol to assess quality of life. We also measured health care costs and productivity costs. With a 4-item questionnaire we asked patients to assess their GPs’ work awareness. Data were collected at baseline, after 6 and 12 months.

Results

Data of 280 patients could be analyzed. The patient related outcomes did not improve after GP training. The change in GP work awareness and the overall mean cost difference (of €770) in favor of the intervention group were not significant.

Conclusions

The training intervention presented in this paper was not cost-effective. Training which is further personalized and targeted at high risk groups with respect to WRP, is more likely to be cost effective.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-019-0924-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Standardized Questionnaire for the Measurement, Valuation, and Estimation of Costs of Informal Care Based on the Opportunity Cost and Proxy Good Method

Costs of informal care account for a significant component of total societal costs for many chronic and disabling illnesses. Yet, costs associated with the provision of informal care is seldom included in economic evaluations of new health technologies, increasing the risk of suboptimal decisions on the allocation of resources from the perspective of society. Our objective was to propose a standardized questionnaire for the measurement, valuation, and estimation of caregiver indirect (productivity) and informal care costs as separate mutually exclusive subsets of total costs in cost-of-illness studies and as an input to economic evaluations from the societal perspective. We developed a questionnaire for data collection and step-by-step analysis procedures for resource valuation and cost estimation. Data concerning absenteeism from work and time devoted to informal care were recorded using the recall method. Indirect (productivity) and paid informal care costs were valued and estimated according to the human-capital approach as the loss of production. Unpaid informal care costs were valued and estimated as the loss of leisure time quantified using the opportunity cost and proxy good method. The new questionnaire, titled the Caregiver Indirect and Informal Care Cost Assessment Questionnaire, contains 13 questions regarding caregiver current and previous work status, productivity, and the provision of informal care (stratified by time devoted to household activities, personal care, practical support, and emotional support). The proposed questionnaire should be helpful to inform the design, implementation, and execution of future cost-of-illness studies and economic evaluations from the perspective of society.

Friction Cost Estimates of Productivity Costs in Cost-of-Illness Studies in Comparison with Human Capital Estimates: A Review

Cost-of-illness (COI) studies often include the 'indirect' cost of lost production resulting from disease, disability, and premature death, which is an important component of the economic burden of chronic conditions assessed from the societal perspective. In most COI studies, productivity costs are estimated primarily as the economic value of production forgone associated with loss of paid employment (foregone gross earnings); some studies include the imputed value of lost unpaid work as well. This approach is commonly but imprecisely referred to as the human capital approach (HCA). However, there is a lack of consensus among health economists as to how to quantify loss of economic productivity. Some experts argue that the HCA overstates productivity losses and propose use of the friction cost approach (FCA) that estimates societal productivity loss as the short-term costs incurred by employers in replacing a lost worker. This review sought to identify COI studies published during 1995-2017 that used the FCA, with or without comparison to the HCA, and to compare FCA and HCA estimates from those studies that used both approaches. We identified 80 full COI studies (of which 75% focused on chronic conditions), roughly 5-8% of all COI studies. The majority of those studies came from three countries, Canada, Germany, and the Netherlands, that have officially endorsed use of the FCA. The FCA results in smaller productivity loss estimates than the HCA, although the differential varied widely across studies. Lack of standardization of HCA and FCA methods makes productivity cost estimates difficult to compare across studies.

Economic Evaluation of an Internet-Based Preventive Cognitive Therapy With Minimal Therapist Support for Recurrent Depression: Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is highly recurrent and has a significant disease burden. Although the effectiveness of internet-based interventions has been established for the treatment of acute MDD, little is known about their cost effectiveness, especially in recurrent MDD.

Objectives

Our aim was to evaluate the cost effectiveness and cost utility of an internet-based relapse prevention program (mobile cognitive therapy, M-CT).

Methods

The economic evaluation was performed alongside a single-blind parallel group randomized controlled trial. Participants were recruited via media, general practitioners, and mental health care institutions. In total, 288 remitted individuals with a history of recurrent depression were eligible, of whom 264 were randomly allocated to M-CT with minimal therapist support added to treatment as usual (TAU) or TAU alone. M-CT comprised 8 online lessons, and participants were advised to complete 1 lesson per week. The economic evaluation was performed from a societal perspective with a 24-month time horizon. The health outcomes were number of depression-free days according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, (DSM-IV) criteria assessed with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV axis I disorders by blinded interviewers after 3, 12, and 24 months. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were self-assessed with the three level version of the EuroQol Five Dimensional Questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L). Costs were assessed with the Trimbos and Institute for Medical Technology Assessment Questionnaire on Costs Associated with Psychiatric Illness (TiC-P). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated and cost-effectiveness planes and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were displayed to assess the probability that M-CT is cost effective compared to TAU.

Results

Mean total costs over 24 months were €8298 (US $9415) for M-CT and €7296 (US $8278) for TAU. No statistically significant differences were found between M-CT and TAU regarding depression-free days and QALYs (P=.37 and P=.92, respectively). The incremental costs were €179 (US $203) per depression-free day and €230,816 (US $261,875) per QALY. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curves suggested that for depression-free days, high investments have to be made to reach an acceptable probability that M-CT is cost effective compared to TAU. Regarding QALYs, considerable investments have to be made but the probability that M-CT is cost effective compared to TAU does not rise above 40%.

Conclusions

The results suggest that adding M-CT to TAU is not effective and cost effective compared to TAU alone. Adherence rates were similar to other studies and therefore do not explain this finding. The participants scarcely booked additional therapist support, resulting in 17.3 minutes of mean total therapist support. More studies are needed to examine the cost effectiveness of internet-based interventions with respect to long-term outcomes and the role and optimal dosage of therapist support. Overall, more research is needed on scalable and cost-effective interventions that can reduce the burden of recurrent MDD.

Trial registration

Netherlands Trial Register NTR2503; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=2503 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/73aBn41r3)

The effects of vortioxetine on cognitive performance in working patients with major depressive disorder: A short-term, randomized, double-blind, exploratory study

BACKGROUND

Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is a complex disease characterized by emotional, physical and cognitive symptoms. We explored the efficacy of vortioxetine versus placebo on outcomes of cognition, functioning and mood symptoms in working patients with depression, using paroxetine as an active reference.

METHODS

Gainfully employed patients (18-65 years, N = 152) with MDD were randomized 1:1:1 to 8 weeks' double-blind, parallel treatment either with vortioxetine (10mg/day) or paroxetine (20mg/day), or with placebo. The primary efficacy measure was the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST), analyzed using a mixed model for repeated measurements, and the key secondary efficacy measure was the University of San Diego Performance-based Skills Assessment - Brief (UPSA-B), analyzed using analysis of covariance (last observation carried forward).

RESULTS

At week 8, DSST and UPSA-B performance had improved relative to baseline in all treatment groups, with no statistically significant differences between treatment groups. While improvements in mood were comparable for vortioxetine and paroxetine, numerical improvements in cognitive performance (DSST) were larger with vortioxetine. Vortioxetine significantly improved overall cognitive performance and clinician-rated functioning relative to placebo. The majority of adverse events were mild or moderate, with nausea being the most common adverse event for vortioxetine.

LIMITATIONS

Small sample sizes implied limited statistical power.

CONCLUSION

This explorative study showed no significant differences versus placebo in DSST or UPSA-B performance at week 8. However, secondary results support vortioxetine as an effective and well-tolerated antidepressant, supporting an added benefit for cognition and functioning, which could have particular therapeutic relevance for the working patient population.

Cognition in depression: Can we THINC-it better?

BACKGROUND

Cognitive compromise is a common experience for patients with depression and other mood disorders. Depressed patients sustain deficits in working memory and attentional distortions in emotional processing and negative attention biases, which may contribute to maintaining their depressive state.

METHODS

The Mood Assessment and Classification (MAC) Committee comprised academic psychiatrists with clinical expertise in the management of mood disorders. The independently convened committee met to discuss contentious aspects of mood disorders diagnosis and assessment with the express aim of informing clinical practice and future research.

RESULTS

The Committee specifically identified cognition as an important aspect for clinicians to consider in the context of depression and mood disorders. This article highlights some of the barriers to assessment and proposes tools that have the potential to be implemented in clinical practice.

LIMITATIONS

The conclusions drawn within this article are based on expert opinion. We have noted the limitations of the literature that informs this opinion.

CONCLUSIONS

As cognitive ability has been closely linked to patients' ability to achieve functional recovery, it is imperative that clinicians are able to identify patients with cognitive deficits and are equipped with tools to conduct effective cognitive assessments. Examining cognitive factors may generate a deeper understanding of the pathogenesis of depression and mood disorders which can ultimately be used to inform treatment.

Valuing productivity loss due to absenteeism: firm-level evidence from a Canadian linked employer-employee survey

In health economic evaluation studies, to value productivity loss due to absenteeism, existing methods use wages as a proxy value for marginal productivity. This study is the first to test the equality between wage and marginal productivity losses due to absenteeism separately for team workers and non-team workers. Our estimates are based on linked employer-employee data from Canada. Results indicate that team workers are more productive and earn higher wages than non-team workers. However, the productivity gap between these two groups is considerably larger than the wage gap. In small firms, employee absenteeism results in lower productivity and wages, and the marginal productivity loss due to team worker absenteeism is significantly higher than the wage loss. No similar wage-productivity gap exists for large firms. Our findings suggest that productivity loss or gain is most likely to be underestimated when valued according to wages for team workers. The findings help to value the burden of illness-related absenteeism. This is important for economic evaluations that seek to measure the productivity gain or loss of a health care technology or intervention, which in turn can impact policy makers' funding decisions.

REFLECTIONS ON THE NICE DECISION TO REJECT PATIENT PRODUCTION LOSSES

Objectives: Patient production losses occur when individuals’ capacities to work, whether paid or unpaid, are impaired by illness, treatment, disability, or death. There is controversy about whether and how to include patient production losses in economic evaluations in health care. Patient production losses have not previously been considered when evaluating medications for reimbursement under the U.K. National Health Service. Proposals for value-based assessment of health technologies in the United Kingdom created renewed interest in whether and how to include costs from a wider societal perspective, such as patient production losses, within economic evaluation of healthcare interventions.

Methods: A narrative review was undertaken of theoretical, ethical, and policy issues that might inform decisions that involve the normative question of whether or not to include patient production losses in economic evaluation.

Results: It seems difficult to reconcile the implications of including patient production losses with the objectives of a healthcare system dedicated to providing universal healthcare coverage without regard to patients’ ability to pay.

Conclusions: Tax payer funded healthcare systems may legitimately adopt maximands other than health gain, but these will be at the opportunity cost of less than maximum health gains.