The U.S. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recently developed recommendations for use of a new recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV).
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of vaccination with RZV ...compared with zoster vaccine live (ZVL) and no vaccination, the cost-effectiveness of vaccination with RZV for persons who have previously received ZVL, and the cost-effectiveness of preferential vaccination with RZV over ZVL.
Simulation (state-transition) model using U.S. epidemiologic, clinical, and cost data.
Published data.
Hypothetical cohort of immunocompetent U.S. adults aged 50 years or older.
Lifetime.
Societal and health care sector.
Vaccination with RZV (recommended 2-dose regimen), vaccination with ZVL, and no vaccination.
The primary outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).
For vaccination with RZV compared with no vaccination, ICERs ranged by age from $10 000 to $47 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), using a societal perspective and assuming 100% completion of the 2-dose RZV regimen. For persons aged 60 years or older, ICERs were less than $60 000 per QALY. Vaccination with ZVL was dominated by vaccination with RZV for all age groups 60 years or older.
Results were most sensitive to changes in vaccine effectiveness, duration of protection, herpes zoster incidence, and probability of postherpetic neuralgia. Vaccination with RZV after previous administration of ZVL yielded an ICER of less than $60 000 per QALY for persons aged 60 years or older. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, RZV remained the preferred strategy in at least 95% of simulations, including those with 50% completion of the second dose.
Few data were available on risk for serious adverse events, adherence to the recommended 2-dose regimen, and probability of recurrent zoster.
Vaccination with RZV yields cost-effectiveness ratios lower than those for many recommended adult vaccines, including ZVL. Results are robust over a wide range of plausible values.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Background
Omission of family and caregiver health spillovers from the economic evaluation of healthcare interventions remains common practice. When reported, a high degree of methodological ...inconsistency in incorporating spillovers has been observed.
Aim
To promote emerging good practice, this paper from the Spillovers in Health Economic Evaluation and Research (SHEER) task force aims to provide guidance on the incorporation of family and caregiver health spillovers in cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis. SHEER also seeks to inform the basis for a spillover research agenda and future practice.
Methods
A modified nominal group technique was used to reach consensus on a set of recommendations, representative of the views of participating subject-matter experts. Through the structured discussions of the group, as well as on the basis of evidence identified during a review process, recommendations were proposed and voted upon, with voting being held over two rounds.
Results
This report describes 11 consensus recommendations for emerging good practice. SHEER advocates for the incorporation of health spillovers into analyses conducted from a healthcare/health payer perspective, and more generally inclusive perspectives such as a societal perspective. Where possible, spillovers related to displaced/foregone activities should be considered, as should the distributional consequences of inclusion. Time horizons ought to be sufficient to capture all relevant impacts. Currently, the collection of primary spillover data is preferred and clear justification should be provided when using secondary data. Transparency and consistency when reporting on the incorporation of health spillovers are crucial. In addition, given that the evidence base relating to health spillovers remains limited and requires much development, 12 avenues for future research are proposed.
Conclusions
Consideration of health spillovers in economic evaluations has been called for by researchers and policymakers alike. Accordingly, it is hoped that the consensus recommendations of SHEER will motivate more widespread incorporation of health spillovers into analyses. The developing nature of spillover research necessitates that this guidance be viewed as an initial roadmap, rather than a strict checklist. Moreover, there is a need for balance between consistency in approach, where valuable in a decision making context, and variation in application, to reflect differing decision maker perspectives and to support innovation.
Chinese parents have access to domestic and foreign vaccines for their children. Their vaccine preferences are unclear, especially given recent pharmaceutical quality scandals and widely held beliefs ...deriving from Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM). This study characterized parental beliefs about the safety and effectiveness of Chinese and foreign vaccines.
In May 2014, caregivers of young children at public immunization clinics in Shanghai, China, responded to a survey on vaccine perceptions. The two outcomes (differential belief in the effectiveness and safety of foreign vs domestic vaccines) were separately regressed onto demographic predictors in multinomial logistic regression models.
Among 618 caregivers, 56% thought the effectiveness of domestic and foreign vaccines were comparable; 33% thought domestic were more effective and 11% foreign. Two-thirds thought foreign and domestic vaccines had similar safety; 11% thought domestic were safer and 21% thought foreign were safer. Compared to college graduates, those with a high school education or less had greater odds of believing domestic vaccines were more effective, and also had greater odds of believing imported vaccines were safer. Greater trust in TCM was not associated with differential beliefs in the effectiveness or safety of domestic vs foreign vaccines.
Although there is no evidence that foreign and domestic vaccines differ in either effectiveness or safety, less educated caregivers in China (but not those with greater trust in TCM) appear to believe such differences exist. Further exploration of the causes of these beliefs may be necessary in order to optimize vaccine communications in China.
Objective
Spillover effects of illness on family members can be substantial. The objective of this study was to identify the domains of family members’ health and well-being that are affected when a ...relative has a chronic health condition.
Methods
Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted in February 2012 with 49 individuals whose relatives had any of five chronic health conditions (arthritis, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease/dementia, cerebral palsy, and depression), purposively sampled to include different relationships with the ill relative (parent, child, spouse). Subjects were queried on whether and how having an ill relative affected their health and well-being; they were also asked about their caregiving responsibilities and the relative’s health. Interview data were analyzed using thematic analysis.
Results
Family members in our sample reported experiencing psychological and non-health effects from having an ill relative, and secondarily somatic effects. Effects on emotional health were most commonly reported as psychological spillover; non-health effects frequently included changes in daily activities and provision of caregiving. Spouses of patients reported the broadest range of spillover domains affected and adolescents of ill parents the fewest. Family members reported experiencing effects that were perceived as both positive and negative.
Conclusions
Spillover of illness onto family members encompasses a wide range of domains of health and well-being, extending beyond those included in many existing health-related quality of life measures. Outcomes measurement efforts should be expanded to adequately capture these health and well-being outcomes for analysis, to ensure that the benefits of interventions are accurately estimated and conclusions are valid.
BACKGROUND:The purpose of this study was to perform a cost-utility analysis to compare revision amputation and replantation treatment of finger amputation injuries across a spectrum of injury ...scenarios.
METHODS:The study was conducted from the societal perspective. Decision tree models were created for the reference case (two-finger amputation injury) and seven additional injury scenarios for comparison. Inputs included cost, quality of life, and probability of each health state. A Web-based time trade-off survey was created to determine quality-adjusted life-years for health states; 685 nationally representative adult community members were invited to participate in the survey. Overall cost and quality-adjusted life-years for revision amputation and replantation were calculated for each decision tree. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated if a treatment was more costly but more effective.
RESULTS:The authors had a 64 percent response rate (n = 437). Replantation treatment had greater costs and quality-adjusted life-years compared with revision amputation in all injury scenarios. Replantation of single-digit injuries had the highest incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ($136,400 per quality-adjusted life-year gained). Replantation of three- and four-digit amputation injuries had relatively low cost-to-benefit ratios ($27,100 and $23,800 per quality-adjusted life-year, respectively). Replantation for distal thumb amputation had a relatively low incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ($26,300 per quality-adjusted life-year) compared with replantation of nonthumb distal amputations ($60,200 per quality-adjusted life-year).
CONCLUSIONS:The relative cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained with replantation treatment varied greatly among the injury scenarios. Situations in which indications for replantation are debated had higher cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. This study highlights variability in value for replantation among different injury scenarios.
Background
Duchenne muscular dystrophy is a rare degenerative neuromuscular disorder with pediatric onset. Recent approvals in Duchenne have placed attention on the economic evaluation in pricing and ...reimbursement decisions across a range of rare conditions. We sought to assess the appropriateness of the EQ-5D, a common measure of generic health state utility, for use among patients and caregivers affected by Duchenne.
Methods
An international, cross-sectional sample of adults with Duchenne and caregivers reported patient health status using self- or proxy-reported EQ-5D-3L. Appropriateness was assessed across 6 domains of concern raised by stakeholders in Duchenne. These concerns were that the EQ-5D/EQ-VAS would not capture meaningful differences in health status, correlate with disease-specific measures, reflect real health status, exhibit face validity, be accurately interpreted, and be low burden. We evaluated these concerns by comparing EQ-5D index score and EQ-VAS scores to other condition-specific functional measures and open- and closed-ended questions.
Results
In total, 263 participants (74% response) completed the survey, 24% of whom were adult patients. Most participants lived in the United States or United Kingdom (58%). Patient age ranged from 1 to 48 y. EQ-5D index was higher in ambulatory than nonambulatory patients (0.60 v. 0.30, P < 0.001) and was negatively correlated with upper limb impairment (r = 0.61, P < 0.001). Three-quarters of respondents agreed that EQ-5D measured real health status (74%). Most respondents interpreted EQ-VAS anchors of best and worst imaginable health as full health (61%) and death/near death (58%). Respondents indicated the EQ-5D was easy to understand (86%) and answer (71%).
Conclusions
Contrary to anecdotal concerns, we found support for the appropriateness of EQ-5D to assess health status in Duchenne. While other measures may be more sensitive to specific outcomes in Duchenne, there may be some value in results using the EQ-5D measure.
Theory-based methods to support the uptake of evidence-based practices (EBPs) are critical to improving mental health outcomes. Implementation strategy costs can be substantial, and few have been ...rigorously evaluated. The purpose of this study is to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis to identify the most cost-effective approach to deploying implementation strategies to enhance the uptake of Life Goals, a mental health EBP.
We used data from a previously conducted randomized trial to compare the cost-effectiveness of Replicating Effective Programs (REP) combined with external and/or internal facilitation among sites non-responsive to REP. REP is a low-level strategy that includes EBP packaging, training, and technical assistance. External facilitation (EF) involves external expert support, and internal facilitation (IF) augments EF with protected time for internal staff to support EBP implementation. We developed a decision tree to assess 1-year costs and outcomes for four implementation strategies: (1) REP only, (2) REP+EF, (3) REP+EF add IF if needed, (4) REP+EF/IF. The analysis used a 1-year time horizon and assumed a health payer perspective. Our outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The economic outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). We conducted deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA).
Our results indicate that REP+EF add IF is the most cost-effective option with an ICER of $593/QALY. The REP+EF/IF and REP+EF only conditions are dominated (i.e., more expensive and less effective than comparators). One-way sensitivity analyses indicate that results are sensitive to utilities for REP+EF and REP+EF add IF. The PSA results indicate that REP+EF, add IF is the optimal strategy in 30% of iterations at the threshold of $100,000/QALY.
Our results suggest that the most cost-effective implementation support begins with a less intensive, less costly strategy initially and increases as needed to enhance EBP uptake. Using this approach, implementation support resources can be judiciously allocated to those clinics that would most benefit. Our results were not robust to changes in the utility measure. Research is needed that incorporates robust and relevant utilities in implementation studies to determine the most cost-effective strategies. This study advances economic evaluation of implementation by assessing costs and utilities across multiple implementation strategy combinations.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02151331 , 05/30/2014.
Background. Applications of cost-effectiveness analysis do not typically incorporate effects on caregiver quality of life despite increasing evidence that these effects are measurable. Methods. Using ...a national sample of US adults, we conducted 2 cross-sectional surveys during December 2011 and January 2012. One version asked respondents to value their own experience as the family member of a person with a chronic illness (experienced sample), and the other version asked respondents to value hypothetical scenarios describing the experience of having a family member with a chronic illness (community sample). Conditions included Alzheimer’s disease/dementia, arthritis, cancer, and depression. Using standard gamble questions, respondents were asked to value the spillover effects of a family member’s illness. We used regression analysis to evaluate the disutility (loss in health-related quality of life) of having a family member with a chronic illness by condition and relationship type, controlling for the respondent’s own conditions and sociodemographic characteristics. Results. For the experienced sample (n = 1389), regression analyses suggested that greater spillover was associated with certain conditions (arthritis, depression) compared with other conditions (Alzheimer’s disease, cancer). For the community sample (n = 1205), regression analyses indicated that lower spillover was associated with condition (cancer) but not the type of relationship with the ill family member (parent, child, spouse). Conclusions. The effects of illness extend beyond the individual patient to include effects on caregivers of patients, parents of ill children, spouses, and other close family and household members. Cost-effectiveness analyses should consider the inclusion of health-related quality of life spillover effects in addition to caregiving time costs incurred by family members of ill individuals.
PDF
