Search

Abstract Background The management of febrile neutropenia (FN) in pediatric cancer patients has traditionally been conducted in a hospital setting. However, recent evidence has indicated that outpatient management of FN can be equally effective compared to inpatient care. Based on this evidence, we conducted a cost-minimization analysis (CMA) specifically focused on pediatric cancer patients in Mexico. Methods A piggy-back study was conducted during the execution of a non-inferiority clinical trial that compared outpatient treatment to inpatient treatment for FN in children with cancer. A CMA was performed from a societal perspective using patient-level data. In the previous study, we observed that step-down oral outpatient management of low-risk FN was as safe and effective as inpatient intravenous management. Direct and indirect costs were collected prospectively. The costs were adjusted for inflation and converted to US dollars, with values standardized to July 2022 costs. Statistical analysis using bootstrap methods was employed to obtain robust estimations for decision-making within the Mexican public health care system. Results A total of 117 FN episodes were analyzed, with 60 in the outpatient group and 57 in the inpatient group; however, complete cost data were available for only 115 FN episodes. The analysis revealed an average savings of $1,087 per FN episode managed on an outpatient basis, representing a significant 92% reduction in total cost per FN episode compared to inpatient treatment. Length of hospital stay and inpatient consultations emerged as the primary cost drivers within the inpatient care group. Conclusion This CMA demonstrates that the step-down outpatient management approach is cost-saving when compared to inpatient management of FN in pediatric cancer patients. The mean difference observed between the treatment groups provides support for decision-making within the public health care system, as outpatient management of FN allows for substantial cost savings without compromising patient health.

Background: The management of febrile neutropenia (FN) in pediatric cancer patients has traditionally been conducted in a hospital setting. However, recent evidence has indicated that outpatient management of FN can be equally effective compared to inpatient care. Based on this evidence, we conducted a cost-minimization analysis (CMA) specifically focused on pediatric cancer patients in Mexico. Methods: A piggy-back study was conducted during the execution of a non-inferiority clinical trial that compared outpatient treatment to inpatient treatment for FN in children with cancer. A CMA was performed from a societal perspective using patient-level data. In the previous study, we observed that step-down oral outpatient management of low-risk FN was as safe and effective as inpatient intravenous management. Direct and indirect costs were collected prospectively. The costs were adjusted for inflation and converted to US dollars, with values standardized to July 2022 costs. Statistical analysis using bootstrap methods was employed to obtain robust estimations for decision-making within the Mexican public health care system. Results: A total of 117 FN episodes were analyzed, with 60 in the outpatient group and 57 in the inpatient group; however, complete cost data were available for only 115 FN episodes. The analysis revealed an average savings of $1,087 per FN episode managed on an outpatient basis, representing a significant 92% reduction in total cost per FN episode compared to inpatient treatment. Length of hospital stay and inpatient consultations emerged as the primary cost drivers within the inpatient care group. Conclusion: This CMA demonstrates that the step-down outpatient management approach is cost-saving when compared to inpatient management of FN in pediatric cancer patients. The mean difference observed between the treatment groups provides support for decision-making within the public health care system, as outpatient management of FN allows for substantial cost savings without compromising patient health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Skin cancers are common in European populations and generate considerable costs. In Denmark, patients with suspicious skin lesions will usually consult their general practitioner who may refer the patient to a dermatologist or plastic surgeon if necessary. However, it is also possible for the general practitioner to take and send dermoscopic and macroscopic photographs of the suspicious skin lesion for evaluation by a dermatologist, so-called teledermoscopy. This study aims to calculate and compare costs of teledermoscopy and standard care in the form of face-to-face evaluation by a dermatologist of suspicious skin lesions referred by general practitioners in the Region of Southern Denmark. Methods: A cost-minimization study was performed. Investment costs, costs in general practice, hospital-associated costs and patient costs were included to calculate the average cost per patient episode. Results: The overall cost of teledermoscopy was €17.2–€23.1 higher than that of standard care. However, hospital-associated costs and patient costs were reduced. Discussion: The total cost of teledermoscopy was slightly higher than the cost of standard care. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the number of preventable face-to-face evaluations and the distance to the dermatologist were the two factors that influenced costs the most. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess whether earlier administration of antibiotic prophylaxis after prelabor rupture of membranes (PROM) at term would decrease the incidence of maternal and neonatal infections. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study comparing women with term PROM who were initiated antibiotic prophylaxis within or after 6 h, and within or after 12 h from PROM to delivery during January 2019 to December 2021. Women with term PROM receiving cephalosporin and without contraindications to vaginal delivery or confirmed or suspected infection were included in the study. The primary outcome was puerperal infection, which refers to the reproductive tract infection occurring within 42 days of delivery. The type of pharmacoeconomic evaluation was selected based on the results of compared effectiveness between the early group and the late group. Propensity‐score matching (PSM) was used to adjust confounding. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were used to verify the robustness of results. Results: We enrolled 5353 women with term PROM, including 4331 initiated with antibiotic within 6 h, 1022 after 6 h, 5077 within 12 h, and 276 after 12 h. After PSM, no significant difference was observed in the baseline characteristics of the groups. There was no statistical difference between antibiotic use within 6 h and after 6 h, or within 12 h and after 12 h, in puerperal infection (4.6% vs. 4.3%, P = 0.826; 2.9% vs. 4.6%, P = 0.471, respectively), total maternal infection, neonatal sepsis, and total neonatal infection. Cost‐minimization analysis showed there was no significant difference between antibiotic use within 6 h and after 6 h, or within 12 h and after 12 h, in direct medical costs. Conclusion: This study showed that there was no statistical difference in the efficacy and economy of antibiotic prophylaxis used within 6–12 h after rupture of membranes versus after 6–12 h in women with term PROM. Synopsis: Early use of antibiotics after term PROM did not reduce the incidence of maternal and neonatal infections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sulfuryl fluoride (SF) is a fumigant used to eliminate drywood termites (DWT: Kalotermitidae; Froggatt) and other structural pests. Because of its global warming potential, it has been suggested that SF be restricted as a greenhouse gas (GHG). We present an economic model to assess the net social cost of restricting SF. We consider 3 approaches to address DWT control- no treatment, allowing SF fumigation and localized treatments, and only local treatment. Each approach generates private and public benefits and costs. We estimate that the annual damage and home equity loss by DWT in California is US$4.5–16.8 billion without treatment. If fumigation is used on 20% of the houses and local treatments on the others, the combined social cost of treatment, damage, and GHG emissions are between US$1–US$2 billion annually.The annual cost of local treatments only would be between US$3.2 and US$4.9 billion. If the application of SF is severely restricted or banned, the social costs will increase between US$1.43 and US$4.31 billion annually. The implied cost per ton of CO2 eliminated is between US$624 and US$1,465, much above the price range of CO2 in other applications. The restriction/ban has significant equity and environmental effects, impacting low-income individuals living in rented properties and replacing damaged wood in housing will increase GHG emissions. We further recommend the continued use of SF until a comparable whole-structure alternative is developed that fits the parameters of our model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Due to limited resources and constant, ever-changing healthcare challenges, health economics is essential to support healthcare decisions while improving health outcomes. Economic evaluation methodology facilitates informed decision-making related to the efficient allocation of resources while positively impacting clinical practice. In this paper, we provide an overview of economic evaluation methods and a real-world example applying one method of economic evaluation (cost-utility analysis) in nursing research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The second most common hematologic cancer worldwide is multiple myeloma (MM), with incidence and mortality rates that have more than doubled over the past 30 years. The safety and efficacy of daratumumab regimens in the treatment of newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) is demonstrated in clinical trials. Objective: To assess the financial effects of the adoption of subcutaneous daratumumab (dara-SC) rather than intravenous daratumumab (dara-IV) for the treatment of NDMM in three Gulf countries (Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates; UAE), a cost-minimization model was constructed. Methods: We performed static cost minimization analyses from a societal perspective to evaluate the costs and possible reductions in resource utilization associated with a shift from dara-IV infusion to dara-SC injection for NDMM patients over a 5-year time horizon. The model included 2 scenarios: the current scenario in which 100% of patients with NDMM are treated with dara-IV infusion and a future scenario in which dara-SC injection is gradually adopted over the modeled time horizon. The model differentiated precisely between autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT)-eligible and ASCT-ineligible NDMM patients in terms of their number in each group and the associated therapeutic regimens. One-way sensitivity analyses were also conducted. Results: The model showed that the use of dara-SC in NDMM patients who were eligible or ineligible for ASCT resulted in lower non-drug costs, including premedication drug costs, adverse-effect costs, administration costs, medical staff costs, and indirect costs. The resulting total savings over the 5-year time horizon of the model for Hamad Medical Corporation, Sultan Qaboos University Hospital/Royal Hospital, Sheikh Shakhbout Medical City (SSMC), and Tawam Hospital were QAR -2 522 686, OMR -143 214, AED -30 010 627, and AED -5 003 471, respectively. Conclusion: The introduction of dara-SC as a front-line treatment for NDMM patients in Qatar (Hamad Medical Corporation), Oman (Sultan Qaboos University Hospital, Royal Hospital-MOH), and the UAE (SSMC and Tawam Hospital) can help save resources and minimize constraints on the healthcare system.