Search

Background: Invasive Group A Streptococcal (iGAS) disease exerts an important burden among Australian children. No Australian hospitalisation cost estimates for treating children with iGAS disease exist, so the financial impact of this condition is unknown.Aim: To determine the minimum annual healthcare cost for children (< 18 years) hospitalised with iGAS disease in Australia from a healthcare sector perspective.Methods: A cost analysis including children with laboratory-confirmed iGAS disease hospitalised at the Royal Children's Hospital (Victoria, Australia; July 2016 to June 2019) was performed. Results were extrapolated against the national minimum iGAS disease incidence. This analysis included healthcare cost from the 7 days prior to the index admission via General Practitioner (GP) and Emergency Department (ED) consultations; the index admission itself; and the 6 months post index admission via rehabilitation admissions, acute re-admissions and outpatient consultations. Additional extrapolations of national cost data by age group, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ethnicity and jurisdiction were performed.Results: Of the 65 included children, 35% (n = 23) were female, 5% (n = 3) were Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, and the average age was 4.4 years (SD 4.6; 65% aged 0-4). The iGAS disease related healthcare cost per child was $67,799 (SD $92,410). These costs were distributed across the 7 days prior to the index admission via GP and ED consultations (0.2 and 1.1% of total costs, respectively), the index admission itself (88.7% of the total costs); and the 6 months post index admission via rehabilitation admissions, acute re-admissions and outpatient consultations (5.3, 4.5 and 0.1% of total costs, respectively). Based on a national minimum paediatric incidence estimation of 1.63 per 100,000 children aged < 18 (95%CI: 1.11-2.32), the total annual healthcare cost for children with iGAS in 2019 was $6,200,862. The financial burden reflects the overrepresentation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the occurrence of iGAS disease. Costs were concentrated among children aged 0-4 years (62%).Conclusion: As these cost estimations were based on a minimum incidence, true costs may be higher. Strengthening of surveillance and control of iGAS disease, including a mandate for national notification of iGAS disease, is warranted.Trial Registration: The current study is a part of ongoing iGAS surveillance work across seven paediatric health services in Australia. As this is not a clinical trial, it has not undergone trial registration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses contemporary approaches to assessing the cost of children in Australia. In response to recent calls for the re-examination of the costs of children, the Australian Institute of Family Studies is arranging to look again at the issue of cost of children in Australia. It observes that, in 1989 at least, families were spending more than they made and that to a certain extent the amount of overspending was a result of the number and ages of their children. There are three main approaches to assessing the cost of children: opinion survey approach, in which "the researcher simply asks a representative sample of families how much it costs to keep their children"; basket-of-goods approach, in which "the researcher specifies a standard "basket" of goods that a child of a given age would need"; expenditure survey approach, in which the researcher "compares the household expenditure of a couple with children and a couple without children who have an equivalent standard of living" and attributes the difference in the expenditures of the two households to the cost of children. INSET: Cost of children in Australia..

The article discusses the differences between results obtained by using the basket-of-goods method and the expenditure survey method in determining the cost of caring for a child in Australia. There are two important differences between results obtained by using the basket-of-goods method and the expenditure survey method. First, the basket-of-goods approach provides only part of the cost of a child, while the expenditure survey measures the total amount spent on the child. Second, the basket-of-goods method indicates how much parents would spend on their children if the child were to enjoy the fruits of the basket specified by the researcher. In this sense, it provides an ideal or desirable costing. In contrast, the expenditure survey approach indicates how much parents actually spend on their children, even though the amount spent might be considered inadequate or excessive by the objective standards of the basket-of-goods method.

Focuses on the report presented by the Australian Institute of Family Studies on the economics of the nation's child-rearing. Widening of the gap between high-income earners and sole parents or low-income families; Steady increase in the costs of maintaining a child.