[Not Available]

Budget impact analysis of adopting primary care-based case detection of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the Canadian general population

BACKGROUND

An estimated 70% of Canadians with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have not received a diagnosis, creating a barrier to early intervention, and there is growing interest in the value of primary care-based opportunistic case detection for COPD. We sought to build on a previous cost-effectiveness analysis by evaluating the budget impact of adopting COPD case detection in the Canadian general population.

METHODS

We used a validated discrete-event microsimulation model of COPD in the Canadian general population aged 40 years and older to assess the costs of implementing 8 primary care-based case detection strategies over 5 years (2022-2026) from the health care payer perspective. Strategies varied in eligibility criteria (based on age, symptoms or smoking history) and testing technology (COPD Diagnostic Questionnaire [CDQ] or screening spirometry). Costs were determined from Canadian studies and converted to 2021 Canadian dollars. Key parameters were varied in one-way sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

All strategies resulted in higher total costs compared with routine diagnosis. The most cost-effective scenario (the CDQ for all patients) had an associated total budget expansion of $423 million, with administering case detection and subsequent diagnostic spirometry accounting for 86% of costs. This strategy increased the proportion of individuals diagnosed with COPD from 30.4% to 37.8%, and resulted in 4.6 million referrals to diagnostic spirometry. Results were most sensitive to uptake in primary care.

INTERPRETATION

Adopting a national COPD case detection program would be an effective method for increasing diagnosis of COPD, dependent on successful uptake. However, it will require prioritisation by budget holders and substantial additional investment to improve access to diagnostic spirometry.

Reductions in inhaler greenhouse gas emissions by addressing care gaps in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: an analysis

INTRODUCTION

Climate change from greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions represents one of the greatest public health threats of our time. Inhalers (and particularly metred-dose inhalers (MDIs)) used for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), constitute an important source of GHGs. In this analysis, we aimed to estimate the carbon footprint impact of improving three distinct aspects of respiratory care that drive avoidable inhaler use in Canada.

METHODS

We used published data to estimate the prevalence of misdiagnosed disease, existing inhaler use patterns, medication class distributions, inhaler type distributions and GHGs associated with inhaler actuations, to quantify annual GHG emissions in Canada: (1) attributable to asthma and COPD misdiagnosis; (2) attributable to overuse of rescue inhalers due to suboptimally controlled symptoms; and (3) avoidable by switching 25% of patients with existing asthma and COPD to an otherwise comparable therapeutic option with a lower GHG footprint.

RESULTS

We identified the following avoidable annual GHG emissions: (1) ~49 100 GHG metric tons (MTs) due to misdiagnosed disease; (2) ~143 000 GHG MTs due to suboptimal symptom control; and (3) ~262 100 GHG MTs due to preferential prescription of strategies featuring MDIs over lower-GHG-emitting options (when 25% of patients are switched to lower GHG alternatives). Combined, the GHG emission reductions from bridging these gaps would be the equivalent to taking ~101 100 vehicles off the roads each year.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis shows that the carbon savings from addressing misdiagnosis and suboptimal disease control are comparable to those achievable by switching one in four patients to lower GHG-emitting therapeutic strategies. Behaviour change strategies required to achieve and sustain delivery of evidence-based real-world care are complex, but the added identified incentive of carbon footprint reduction may in itself prove to be a powerful motivator for change among providers and patients. This additional benefit can be leveraged in future behaviour change interventions.