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.

UK endoscopy workload and workforce patterns: is there potential to increase capacity? A BSG analysis of the National Endoscopy Database.

Background: The lack of comprehensive national data on endoscopy activity and workforce hampers strategic planning. The National Endoscopy Database (NED) provides a unique opportunity to address this in the UK. We evaluated NED to inform service planning, exploring opportunities to expand capacity to meet service demands. Design: Data on all procedures between 1 March 2019 and 29 February 2020 were extracted from NED. Endoscopy activity and endoscopist workforce were analysed. Results: 1 639 640 procedures were analysed (oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) 693 663, colonoscopy 586 464, flexible sigmoidoscopy 335 439 and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography 23 074) from 407 sites by 4990 endoscopists. 89% of procedures were performed in NHS sites. 17% took place each weekday, 10% on Saturdays and 6% on Sundays. Training procedures accounted for 6% of total activity, over 99% of which took place in NHS sites. Median patient age was younger in the independent sector (IS) (51 vs 60 years, p<0.001). 74% of endoscopists were male. Gastroenterologists and surgeons each comprised one-third of the endoscopist workforce; non-medical endoscopists (NMEs) comprised 12% yet undertook 23% of procedures. Approximately half of endoscopists performing OGD (52%) or colonoscopies (48%) did not meet minimum annual procedure numbers. Conclusion: This comprehensive analysis reveals endoscopy workload and workforce patterns for the first time across both the NHS and the IS in all four UK nations. Half of all endoscopists perform fewer than the recommended minimum annual procedure numbers: a national strategy to address this, along with expansion of the NME workforce, would increase endoscopy capacity, which could be used to exploit latent weekend capacity.

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in patients with signs or symptoms of suspected colorectal cancer (CRC): a joint guideline from the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG).

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has a high sensitivity for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). In a symptomatic population FIT may identify those patients who require colorectal investigation with the highest priority. FIT offers considerable advantages over the use of symptoms alone, as an objective measure of risk with a vastly superior positive predictive value for CRC, while conversely identifying a truly low risk cohort of patients. The aim of this guideline was to provide a clear strategy for the use of FIT in the diagnostic pathway of people with signs or symptoms of a suspected diagnosis of CRC. The guideline was jointly developed by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/British Society of Gastroenterology, specifically by a 21-member multidisciplinary guideline development group (GDG). A systematic review of 13 535 publications was undertaken to develop 23 evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations for the triage of people with symptoms of a suspected CRC diagnosis in primary care. In order to achieve consensus among a broad group of key stakeholders, we completed an extended Delphi of the GDG, and also 61 other individuals across the UK and Ireland, including by members of the public, charities and primary and secondary care. Seventeen research recommendations were also prioritised to inform clinical management.

The cost of lost productivity due to premature mortality associated with COVID-19: a Pan-European study.

BACKGROUND: Economic cost estimates have the potential to provide a valuable alternative perspective on the COVID-19 burden. We estimate the premature mortality productivity costs associated with COVID-19 across Europe. METHODS: We calculated excess deaths between the date the cumulative total of COVID-19 deaths reached 10 in a country to 15th May 2020 for nine countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland). Gender- and age-specific excess deaths and Years of Potential Productive Life Lost (YPPLL) between 30 and 74 years were calculated and converted into premature mortality productivity costs €2020 for paid and unpaid work using the Human Capital and the Proxy Good Approaches. Costs were discounted at 3.5%. RESULTS: Total estimated excess deaths across the nine countries were 18,614 (77% in men) and YPPLL were 134,190 (77% male). Total paid premature mortality costs were €1.07 billion (87% male) with Spain (€0.35 billion, 33.0% of total), Italy (€0.22 billion; 20.6%) and The Netherlands (€0.19 billion; 17.5%) ranking highest. Total paid and unpaid premature mortality costs were €2.89 billion (77% male). Premature mortality costs per death ranged between €40,382 (France) and €350,325 (Switzerland). Spain experienced the highest premature mortality cost as a proportion of Gross Domestic Product (0.11%). CONCLUSION: Even in the initial period of the pandemic in Europe, COVID-19-related premature mortality costs were significant across Europe. We provide policy makers and researchers with a valuable alternative perspective on the burden of the virus and highlight potential economic savings that may be accrued by applying timely public health measures.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on UK endoscopic activity and cancer detection: a National Endoscopy Database Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a major global impact on endoscopic services. This reduced capacity, along with public reluctance to undergo endoscopy during the pandemic, might result in excess mortality from delayed cancer diagnosis. Using the UK's National Endoscopy Database (NED), we performed the first national analysis of the impact of the pandemic on endoscopy services and endoscopic cancer diagnosis. DESIGN: We developed a NED COVID-19 module incorporating procedure-level data on all endoscopic procedures. Three periods were designated: pre-COVID (6 January 2020 to 15 March), transition (16-22 March) and COVID-impacted (23 March-31 May). National, regional and procedure-specific analyses were performed. The average weekly number of cancers, proportion of missing cancers and cancer detection rates were calculated. RESULTS: A weekly average of 35 478 endoscopy procedures were performed in the pre-COVID period. Activity in the COVID-impacted period reduced to 12% of pre-COVID levels; at its low point, activity was only 5%, recovering to 20% of pre-COVID activity by study end. Although more selective vetting significantly increased the per-procedure cancer detection rate (pre-COVID 1.91%; COVID-impacted 6.61%; p<0.001), the weekly number of cancers detected decreased by 58%. The proportion of missing cancers ranged from 19% (pancreatobiliary) to 72% (colorectal). CONCLUSION: This national analysis demonstrates the remarkable impact that the pandemic has had on endoscopic services, which has resulted in a substantial and concerning reduction in cancer detection. Major, urgent efforts are required to restore endoscopy capacity to prevent an impending cancer healthcare crisis.