Hospitalization costs of coronaviruses diseases in upper-middle-income countries: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19, SARS and MERS are diseases that present an important health burden worldwide. This situation demands resource allocation to the healthcare system, affecting especially middle- and low-income countries. Thus, identifying the main cost drivers is relevant to optimize patient care and resource allocation. OBJECTIVE: To systematically identify and summarize the current status of knowledge on direct medical hospitalization costs of SARS, MERS, or COVID-19 in Upper-Middle-Income Countries. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review across seven key databases (PubMed, EMBASE, BVS Portal, CINAHL, CRD library, MedRxiv and Research Square) from database inception to February 2021. Costs extracted were converted into 2021 International Dollars using the Purchasing Power Parity-adjusted. The assessment of quality was based on the protocol by the BMJ and CHEERS. PROSPERO 2020: CRD42020225757. RESULTS: No eligible study about SARS or MERS was recovered. For COVID-19, five studies presented cost analysis performed in Brazil, China, Iran, and Turkey. Regarding total direct medical costs, the lowest cost per patient at ward was observed in Turkey ($900.08), while the highest in Brazil ($5,093.38). At ICU, the lowest was in Turkey ($2,984.78), while the highest was in China ($52,432.87). Service care was the most expressive (58% to 88%) cost driver of COVID-19 patients at ward. At ICU, there was no consensus between service care (54% to 87%) and treatment (72% to 81%) as key burdens of total cost. CONCLUSION: Our findings elucidate the importance of COVID-19 on health-economic outcomes. The marked heterogeneity among studies leaded to substantially different results and made challenging the comparison of data to estimate pooled results for single countries or regions. Further studies concerning cost estimates from standardized analysis may provide clearer data for a more substantial analysis. This may help care providers and policy makers to organize care for patients in the most efficient way.

Hospitalization costs for COVID-19 in Ethiopia: Empirical data and analysis from Addis Ababa's largest dedicated treatment center.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused profound health, economic, and social disruptions globally. We assessed the full costs of hospitalization for COVID-19 disease at Ekka Kotebe COVID-19 treatment center in Addis Ababa, the largest hospital dedicated to COVID-19 patient care in Ethiopia. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We retrospectively collected and analysed clinical and cost data on patients admitted to Ekka Kotebe with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infections. Cost data included personnel time and salaries, drugs, medical supplies and equipment, facility utilities, and capital costs. Facility medical records were reviewed to assess the average duration of stay by disease severity (either moderate, severe, or critical). The data collected covered the time-period March-November 2020. We then estimated the cost per treated COVID-19 episode, stratified by disease severity, from the perspective of the provider. Over the study period there were 2,543 COVID-19 cases treated at Ekka Kotebe, of which, 235 were critical, 515 were severe, and 1,841 were moderate. The mean patient duration of stay varied from 9.2 days (95% CI: 7.6-10.9; for moderate cases) to 19.2 days (17.9-20.6; for critical cases). The mean cost per treated episode was USD 1,473 (95% CI: 1,197-1,750), but cost varied by disease severity: the mean cost for moderate, severe, and critical cases were USD 1,266 (998-1,534), USD 1,545 (1,413-1,677), and USD 2,637 (1,788-3,486), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical management and treatment of COVID-19 patients poses an enormous economic burden to the Ethiopian health system. Such estimates of COVID-19 treatment costs inform financial implications for resource-constrained health systems and reinforce the urgency of implementing effective infection prevention and control policies, including the rapid rollout of COVID-19 vaccines, in low-income countries like Ethiopia.

Remdesivir and dexamethasone as tools to relieve hospital care systems stressed by COVID-19: A modelling study on bed resources and budget impact.

Remdesivir and dexamethasone are the only drugs providing reductions in the lengths of hospital stays for COVID-19 patients. We assessed the impacts of remdesivir on hospital-bed resources and budgets affected by the COVID-19 outbreak. A stochastic agent-based model was combined with epidemiological data available on the COVID-19 outbreak in France and data from two randomized control trials. Strategies involving treating with remdesivir only patients with low-flow oxygen and patients with low-flow and high-flow oxygen were examined. Treating all eligible low-flow oxygen patients during the entirety of the second wave would have decreased hospital-bed occupancy in conventional wards by 4% [2%; 7%] and intensive care unit (ICU)-bed occupancy by 9% [6%; 13%]. Extending remdesivir use to high-flow-oxygen patients would have amplified reductions in ICU-bed occupancy by up to 14% [18%; 11%]. A minimum remdesivir uptake of 20% was required to observe decreases in bed occupancy. Dexamethasone had effects of similar amplitude. Depending on the treatment strategy, using remdesivir would, in most cases, generate savings (up to 722€) or at least be cost neutral (an extra cost of 34€). Treating eligible patients could significantly limit the saturation of hospital capacities, particularly in ICUs. The generated savings would exceed the costs of medications.

Assessment of Out-of-Pocket Spending for COVID-19 Hospitalizations in the US in 2020.

Importance: Many insurers waived cost sharing for COVID-19 hospitalizations during 2020. Nonetheless, patients may have been billed if their plans did not implement waivers or if waivers did not capture all hospitalization-related care. Assessment of out-of-pocket spending for COVID-19 hospitalizations in 2020 may show the financial burden that patients may experience if insurers allow waivers to expire, as many chose to do during 2021. Objective: To estimate out-of-pocket spending for COVID-19 hospitalizations in the US in 2020. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus for Academics Database, a national claims database representing 7.7 million privately insured patients and 1.0 million Medicare Advantage patients, regarding COVID-19 hospitalizations for privately insured and Medicare Advantage patients from March to September 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mean total out-of-pocket spending, defined as the sum of out-of-pocket spending for facility services billed by hospitals (eg, accommodation charges) and professional and ancillary services billed by clinicians and ancillary providers (eg, clinician inpatient evaluation and management, ambulance transport). Results: Analyses included 4075 hospitalizations; 2091 (51.3%) were for male patients, and the mean (SD) age of patients was 66.8 (14.8) years. Of these hospitalizations, 1377 (33.8%) were for privately insured patients. Out-of-pocket spending for facility services, professional and ancillary services, or both was reported for 981 of 1377 hospitalizations for privately insured patients (71.2%) and 1324 of 2968 hospitalizations for Medicare Advantage patients (49.1%). Among these hospitalizations, mean (SD) total out-of-pocket spending was $788 ($1411) for privately insured patients and $277 ($363) for Medicare Advantage patients. In contrast, out-of-pocket spending for facility services was reported for 63 hospitalizations for privately insured patients (4.6%) and 36 hospitalizations for Medicare Advantage patients (1.3%). Among these hospitalizations, mean (SD) total out-of-pocket spending was $3840 ($3186) for privately insured patients and $1536 ($1402) for Medicare Advantage patients. Total out-of-pocket spending exceeded $4000 for 2.5% of privately insured hospitalizations compared with 0.2% of Medicare Advantage hospitalizations. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, few patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in 2020 were billed for facility services provided by hospitals, suggesting that most were covered by insurers with cost-sharing waivers. However, many patients were billed for professional and ancillary services, suggesting that insurer cost-sharing waivers may not have covered all hospitalization-related care. High cost sharing for patients who were billed by facility services suggests that out-of-pocket spending may be substantial for patients whose insurers have allowed waivers to expire.

Patient Characteristics and Costs Associated With COVID-19-Related Medical Care Among Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: New cases of COVID-19 continue to occur daily in the United States, and the need for medical treatments continues to grow. Knowledge of the direct medical costs of COVID-19 treatments is limited. OBJECTIVE: To examine the characteristics of older adults with COVID-19 and their costs for COVID-19-related medical care. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Medical claims for Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries. PATIENTS: Medicare FFS beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who had a COVID-19-related medical encounter during April through December 2020. MEASUREMENTS: Patient characteristics and direct medical costs of COVID-19-related hospitalizations and outpatient visits. RESULTS: Among 28.1 million Medicare FFS beneficiaries, 1 181 127 (4.2%) sought COVID-19-related medical care. Among these patients, 23.0% had an inpatient stay and 4.2% died during hospitalization. The majority of the patients were female (57.0%), non-Hispanic White (79.6%), and residents of an urban county (77.2%). Medicare FFS costs for COVID-19-related medical care were $6.3 billion; 92.6% of costs were for hospitalizations. The mean hospitalization cost was $21 752, and the mean length of stay was 9.2 days; hospitalization cost and length of stay were higher if the patient needed a ventilator ($49 441 and 17.1 days) or died ($32 015 and 11.3 days). The mean cost per outpatient visit was $164. Patients aged 75 years or older were more likely to be hospitalized, but their hospitalizations were associated with lower costs than for younger patients. Male sex and non-White race/ethnicity were associated with higher probability of being hospitalized and higher medical costs. LIMITATION: Results are based on Medicare FFS patients. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in substantial disease and economic burden among older Americans, particularly those of non-White race/ethnicity. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Impacts of Neonatal Hospitalization on Families during the 2019 Coronavirus Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Limited data are available regarding family and financial well-being among parents whose infants were hospitalized during the 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The study objective was to evaluate the family and financial well-being of parents whose infants were hospitalized in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) during COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: Parents were recruited for this online, cross-sectional survey via support groups on social media. Data collection was completed between May 18, 2020 and July 31, 2020. The final sample consisted of 178 parents, who had an infant hospitalized in an NICU between February 1, 2020 and July 31, 2020. The primary outcomes were impact on family life and financial stability, as measured by the Impact on Family scale, an instrument that evaluates changes to family life as a result of infant or childhood illness. RESULTS: Of the 178 parent respondents, 173 (97%) were mothers, 107 (59.4%) were non-Hispanic White, and 127 (69.5%) of the infants were born prematurely. Parents reported significant family impact and greater financial difficulty. Extremely premature infants, lower household income, parent mental health, and lower parental confidence were predictive of greater impacts on family life. CONCLUSION: Parents reported significant family and financial impacts during their infant's hospitalization amid COVID-19. Further studies are needed to guide clinical practice and inform family-supportive resources that can mitigate consequences to family well-being. KEY POINTS: · Impact of infant hospitalization in the context of COVID-19 is largely unknown.. · In a cohort of NICU parents during COVID-19, they reported changes to family life and finances.. · Greater impacts were reported by parents with lower income, confidence, and very premature infants..

Resource utilization and outcomes in emergency general surgery during the COVID19 pandemic: An observational cost analysis.

BACKGROUND: Over the course of the COVID19 pandemic, global healthcare delivery has declined. Surgery is one of the most resource-intensive area of medicine; loss of surgical care has had untold health and economic consequences. Herein, we evaluate resource utilization, outcomes, and healthcare costs associated with unplanned surgery admissions during the height of the pandemic in 2020 versus the same period in 2019. METHODS: Retrospective analysis on patients ≥18 years admitted from the emergency department to General & Digestive and Gastrointestinal Surgery Services between February and May 2019 and 2020 at our center; clinical outcomes and unadjusted and adjusted per-person healthcare costs were analyzed. RESULTS: Consults and admissions to surgery declined between February and May 2020 by 37% and 19%, respectively, relative to the same period in 2019, with even greater relative decline during late March and early April. Time between onset of symptoms to diagnosis increased from 2±3 days 2019 to 5±22 days 2020 (P = 0.01). Overall hospital stay was two days less in 2020 (P = 0.19). Complications (Comprehensive Complication Index 10.3±23.7 2019 vs. 13.9±25.5 2020, P = 0.10) and mortality rates (3% vs. 4%, respectively, P = 0.58) did not vary. Mean unadjusted per-person costs for patients in the 2019 and 2020 cohorts were 5,886.72€±12,576.33€ and 5,287.62±7,220.16€, respectively (P = 0.43). Following multivariate analysis, costs remained similar (4,656.89€±390.53€ 2019 vs. 4,938.54±406.55€ 2020, P = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare delivery and spending for unplanned general surgery admissions declined considerably due to COVID19. These results provide a small yet relevant illustration of clinical and economic ramifications of this healthcare crisis.

Characteristics in Pediatric Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Korea.

BACKGROUND: Based on the reports of low prevalence and severity of pediatric severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections, the Korean government has released new SARS-CoV-2 infection response and treatment guidelines for children under the age of 12 years. The government has further directed school reopening under strict preventive measures. However, there is still considerable concern on the impact of school reopening on community transmission of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of these directives and the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infections in children as compared to adults using sufficient national sample data. METHODS: In the present study, we evaluated the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pediatric patients as compared to adults by analyzing the length of hospital stays (LOS), medical expenses, and hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates. A multivariate linear regression analysis was carried out to examine the effects of COVID-19 patients that the characteristics on the LOS and medical expenses, and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to identify COVID-19 characteristics that affect hospital and ICU admission rates and to prove the low SARS-CoV-2 infection severity in pediatric patients. RESULTS: The hospitalization period for children aged 0-9 was 37% shorter and that of patients aged 10-19 years was 31% shorter than those of older age groups (P < 0.001). The analysis of the medical expenses by age showed that on average, medical expenses for children were approximately 4,900 USD lower for children than for patients over 80 years of age. The linear regression analysis also showed that patients who were 0-9 years old spent 87% and those aged 10-19 118% less on medical expenses than those aged 70 and over, even after the correction of other variables (P < 0.001). The probability of hospitalization was the lowest at 10-19 years old (odds ratio [OR], 0.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03-0.09), and their ICU admission rate was also the lowest at 0.14 (OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.08-0.24). On the other hand, the likelihood of hospitalization and ICU admission was the highest in children aged 0-9 years, and among patients under the age of 50 years in general. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the low severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in younger patients (0-19 years) by analyzing the LOS, medical expenses, hospital, and intensive care unit admission rates as outcome variables. As the possibility to develop severe infection of coronavirus at the age of 10-19 was the lowest, a mitigation policy is also required for middle and high school students. In addition, children with underlying diseases need to be protected from high-risk infection environments.

Out-of-Pocket Spending for Influenza Hospitalizations in Medicare Advantage.

INTRODUCTION: Although many Medicare Advantage plans have waived cost sharing for COVID-19 hospitalizations, these waivers are voluntary and may be temporary. To estimate the magnitude of potential patient cost sharing if waivers are not implemented or are allowed to expire, this study assesses the level and predictors of out-of-pocket spending for influenza hospitalizations in 2018 among elderly Medicare Advantage patients. METHODS: Using the Optum De-Identified Clinformatics DataMart, investigators identified Medicare Advantage patients aged ≥65 years hospitalized for influenza in 2018. For each hospitalization, out-of-pocket spending was calculated by summing deductibles, coinsurance, and copays. The mean out-of-pocket spending and the proportion of hospitalizations with out-of-pocket spending exceeding $2,500 were calculated. A 1-part generalized linear model with a log link and Poisson variance function was fitted to model out-of-pocket spending as a function of patient demographic characteristics, plan type, and hospitalization characteristics. Coefficients were converted to absolute changes in out-of-pocket spending by calculating average marginal effects. RESULTS: Among 14,278 influenza hospitalizations, the mean out-of-pocket spending was $987 (SD=$799). Out-of-pocket spending exceeded $2,500 for 3.0% of hospitalizations. The factors associated with higher out-of-pocket spending included intensive care use, greater length of stay, and enrollment in a preferred provider organization plan (average marginal effect=$634, 95% CI=$631, $636) compared with enrollment in an HMO plan. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of elderly Medicare Advantage patients, the mean out-of-pocket spending for influenza hospitalizations was almost $1,000. Federal policymakers should consider passing legislation mandating insurers to eliminate cost sharing for COVID-19 hospitalizations. Insurers with existing cost-sharing waivers should consider extending them indefinitely, and those without such waivers should consider implementing them immediately.

The economic burden of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): evidence from Iran.

This study aimed to estimate both direct medical and indirect costs of treating the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from a societal perspective in the patients at a referral hospital in Fars province as well as the economic burden of COVID-19 in Iran in 2020. METHODS: This study is a partial economic evaluation and a cross-sectional cost-description study conducted based on the data of the COVID-19 patients referred to a referral university hospital in Fars province between March and July 2020. The data were collected by examining the patients' records and accounting information systems. The subjects included all the inpatients with COVID-19 (477 individuals) who admitted to the medical centre during the 4 months. Bottom-up costing (also called micro-costing approach), incidence-based and income-based human capital approaches were used as the main methodological features of this study. RESULTS: The direct medical costs were estimated to be 28,240,025,968 Rials ($ 1,791,172) in total with mean cost of 59,203,409 Rials ($ 3755) per person (SD = 4684 $/ 73,855,161 Rials) in which significant part (41%) was that of intensive and general care beds (11,596,217,487 Rials equal to $ 735,510 (M = 24,310,728 Rials or $ 1542, SD = 34,184,949 Rials or $ 2168(. The second to which were the costs of medicines and medical consumables (28%). The mean indirect costs, including income loss due to premature death, economic production loss due to hospitalization and job absenteeism during recovery course were estimated to be 129,870,974 Rials ($ 11,634) per person. Furthermore, the economic burden of the disease in the country for inpatient cases with the definitive diagnosis was 22,688,925,933,095 Rials equal to $ 1,439,083,784. CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed that the severe status of the disease would bring about the extremely high cost of illness in this case. It is estimated that the high prevalence rate of COVID-19 has been imposing a heavy economic burden on the country and health system directly that may result in rationing or painful cost-control approaches.

Costs of the COVID-19 pandemic associated with obesity in Europe: A health-care cost model.

Excess weight is associated with severe outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to estimate the total secondary care costs by body mass index (BMI, kg/m2 ) category when hospitalized due to COVID-19 in Europe during the first wave of the pandemic from January to June 2020. Building a health-care cost model, this study aimed to estimate the total costs of COVID-19. Information on risk of hospitalization, admission to intensive care unit (ICU) and risk of ventilation were based on published data. Average cost per patient and in total were calculated based on risks of admission to ICU, risk of invasive mechanical ventilation and length of hospital stay when hospitalized and published costs associated with hospitalization. The total direct costs of secondary care during the first wave of COVID-19 in Europe were estimated at EUR 13.9 billon, whereof 76% accounted for treating people with overweight and obesity. The average cost per hospital admission increased with BMI, from EUR 15831 for BMI <25 kg/m2 to EUR 30982 for BMI ≥40 kg/m2 . This study reveals that excess weight contributes disproportionally to the costs of COVID-19. This might reflect that overweight and obesity caused the COVID-19 pandemic to result in more severe outcomes for citizens and higher secondary care costs throughout Europe.

Health outcomes and economic burden of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to evaluate health outcomes and the economic burden of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the United States. METHODS: Hospitalized patients with a primary or secondary discharge diagnosis code for COVID-19 (ICD-10 code U07.1) from 1 April to 31 October 2020 were identified in the Premier Healthcare COVID-19 Database. Patient demographics, hospitalization characteristics, and concomitant medical conditions were assessed. Hospital length of stay (LOS), in-hospital mortality, hospital charges, and hospital costs were evaluated overall and stratified by age groups, insurance types, and 4 COVID-19 disease progression states based on intensive care unit (ICU) and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) usage. RESULTS: Of the 173,942 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, the median age was 63 years, 51.0% were male, and 48.5% were covered by Medicare. The most prevalent concomitant medical conditions were cardiovascular disease (73.5%), hypertension (64.8%), diabetes (40.7%), obesity (27.0%), and chronic kidney disease (24.2%). Approximately one-fifth (21.9%) of the hospitalized COVID-19 patients were admitted to the ICU and 16.9% received IMV; most patients (73.6%) did not require ICU admission or IMV, and 12.4% required both. The median hospital LOS was 5 days, in-hospital mortality was 13.6%, median hospital charges were $43,986, and median hospital costs were $12,046. Hospital LOS and in-hospital mortality increased with ICU and/or IMV usage and age; hospital charges and costs increased with ICU and/or IMV usage. Patients with both ICU and IMV usage had the longest median hospital LOS (15 days), highest in-hospital mortality (53.8%), and highest hospital charges ($198,394) and hospital costs ($54,402). LIMITATIONS: This retrospective administrative database analysis relied on coding accuracy and a subset of admissions with validated/reconciled hospital costs. CONCLUSIONS: This study summarizes the severe health outcomes and substantial hospital costs of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the US. The findings support the urgent need for rapid implementation of effective interventions, including safe and efficacious vaccines.

The role of CPAP as a potential bridge to invasive ventilation and as a ceiling-of-care for patients hospitalized with Covid-19-An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) ventilation may be used as a potential bridge to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), or as a ceiling-of-care for persistent hypoxaemia despite standard oxygen therapy, according to UK guidelines. We examined the association of mode of respiratory support and ceiling-of-care on mortality. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of routinely collected de-identified data of adults with nasal/throat SARs-CoV-2 swab-positive results, at the Calderdale and Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust between 10th March-19th April 2020 (outcomes determined on 22nd May). FINDINGS: Of 347 patients with SARs-CoV-2 swab-positive results, 294 (84.7%) patients admitted for Covid-19 were included in the study. Sixty-nine patients were trialled on CPAP, mostly delivered by face mask, either as an early ceiling of care instituted within 24 hours of admission (N = 19), or as a potential bridge to IMV (N = 44). Patients receiving a ceiling of care more than 24 hours after admission (N = 6) were excluded from the analysis. Two hundred and fifteen patients (73.1%) maximally received air/standard oxygen therapy, and 45 (15.3%) patients maximally received CPAP. Thirty-four patients (11.6%) required IMV, of which 24 had received prior CPAP. There were 138 patients with an early ceiling-of-care plan (pre-admission/within 24h). Overall, 103(35.0%) patients died and 191(65.0%) were alive at study end. Among all patients trialled on CPAP either as a potential bridge to IMV (N = 44) or as a ceiling-of-care (N = 19) mortality was 25% and 84%, respectively. Overall, there was strong evidence for higher mortality among patients who required CPAP or IMV, compared to those who required only air/oxygen (aOR 5.24 95%CI: 1.38, 19.81 and aOR 46.47 95%CI: 7.52, 287.08, respectively; p<0.001), and among patients with early ceiling-of-care compared to those without a ceiling (aOR 41.81 95%CI: 8.28, 211.17; p<0.001). Among patients without a ceiling of care (N = 137), 10 patients required prompt intubation following failed oxygen therapy, but 44 patients received CPAP. CPAP failure, defined as death (N = 1) or intubation (N = 24), occurred in 57% (N = 25) of patients. But in total, 75% (N = 33) of those started on CPAP with no ceiling of care recovered to discharge-19 without the need for IMV, and 14 following IMV. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that among patients with no ceiling-of-care, an initial trial of CPAP as a potential bridge to IMV offers a favourable therapeutic alternative to early intubation. In contrast, among patients with a ceiling-of care, CPAP seems to offer little additional survival benefit beyond oxygen therapy alone. Information on ceilings of respiratory support is vital to interpreting mortality from Covid-19. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY: Sample size relatively small.Study sample representative of hospitalised Covid-19 patients in UK.Previously unreported data on role of ceilings-of-care in hospitalised Covid-19 patients.Novel data on use of CPAP separated by indication.

Clinical Outcomes, Costs, and Cost-effectiveness of Strategies for Adults Experiencing Sheltered Homelessness During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Approximately 356 000 people stay in homeless shelters nightly in the United States. They have high risk of contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objective: To assess the estimated clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness associated with strategies for COVID-19 management among adults experiencing sheltered homelessness. Design, Setting, and Participants: This decision analytic model used a simulated cohort of 2258 adults residing in homeless shelters in Boston, Massachusetts. Cohort characteristics and costs were adapted from Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program. Disease progression, transmission, and outcomes data were taken from published literature and national databases. Surging, growing, and slowing epidemics (effective reproduction numbers [Re], 2.6, 1.3, and 0.9, respectively) were examined. Costs were from a health care sector perspective, and the time horizon was 4 months, from April to August 2020. Exposures: Daily symptom screening with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing of individuals with positive symptom screening results, universal PCR testing every 2 weeks, hospital-based COVID-19 care, alternative care sites (ACSs) for mild or moderate COVID-19, and temporary housing were each compared with no intervention. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cumulative infections and hospital-days, costs to the health care sector (US dollars), and cost-effectiveness, as incremental cost per case of COVID-19 prevented. Results: The simulated population of 2258 sheltered homeless adults had a mean (SD) age of 42.6 (9.04) years. Compared with no intervention, daily symptom screening with ACSs for pending tests or confirmed COVID-19 and mild or moderate disease was associated with 37% fewer infections (1954 vs 1239) and 46% lower costs ($6.10 million vs $3.27 million) at an Re of 2.6, 75% fewer infections (538 vs 137) and 72% lower costs ($1.46 million vs $0.41 million) at an Re of 1.3, and 51% fewer infections (174 vs 85) and 51% lower costs ($0.54 million vs $0.26 million) at an Re of 0.9. Adding PCR testing every 2 weeks was associated with a further decrease in infections; incremental cost per case prevented was $1000 at an Re of 2.6, $27 000 at an Re of 1.3, and $71 000 at an Re of 0.9. Temporary housing with PCR every 2 weeks was most effective but substantially more expensive than other options. Compared with no intervention, temporary housing with PCR every 2 weeks was associated with 81% fewer infections (376) and 542% higher costs ($39.12 million) at an Re of 2.6, 82% fewer infections (95) and 2568% higher costs ($38.97 million) at an Re of 1.3, and 59% fewer infections (71) and 7114% higher costs ($38.94 million) at an Re of 0.9. Results were sensitive to cost and sensitivity of PCR and ACS efficacy in preventing transmission. Conclusions and Relevance: In this modeling study of simulated adults living in homeless shelters, daily symptom screening and ACSs were associated with fewer severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections and decreased costs compared with no intervention. In a modeled surging epidemic, adding universal PCR testing every 2 weeks was associated with further decrease in SARS-CoV-2 infections at modest incremental cost and should be considered during future surges.

Survival and Estimation of Direct Medical Costs of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

OBJECTIVES: Assess the survival of hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients across age groups, sex, use of mechanical ventilators (MVs), nationality, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. METHODS: Data were retrieved from the Saudi Ministry of Health (MoH) between 1 March and 29 May 2020. Kaplan-Meier (KM) analyses and multiple Cox proportional-hazards regression were conducted to assess the survival of hospitalized COVID-19 patients from hospital admission to discharge (censored) or death. Micro-costing was used to estimate the direct medical costs associated with hospitalization per patient. RESULTS: The number of included patients with complete status (discharge or death) was 1422. The overall 14-day survival was 0.699 (95%CI: 0.652-0.741). Older adults (>70 years) (HR = 5.00, 95%CI = 2.83-8.91), patients on MVs (5.39, 3.83-7.64), non-Saudi patients (1.37, 1.01-1.89), and ICU admission (2.09, 1.49-2.93) were associated with a high risk of mortality. The mean cost per patient (in SAR) for those admitted to the general Medical Ward (GMW) and ICU was 42,704.49 ± 29,811.25 and 79,418.30 ± 55,647.69, respectively. CONCLUSION: The high hospitalization costs for COVID-19 patients represents a significant public health challenge. Efficient allocation of healthcare resources cannot be emphasized enough.

Costs of COVID-19 pandemic associated with diabetes in Europe: a health care cost model.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes is associated with progression to severe COVID-19. The objective of this study was to estimate to what extent the increased risk among people with diabetes could impact the secondary care costs of COVID-19 throughout Europe during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic from January to June 2020. METHODS: Applying a health care cost model based on inputs from data published in international peer-reviewed journals, identified via a rapid literature review this study aimed to estimate the total secondary sector costs of COVID-19. Estimates of unit costs were based on data from Denmark, France, Spain and the UK. We calculated average costs per patient without diabetes and according to four diabetes categories based on risk of hospitalization, admission to intensive care unit, ventilator support and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: The estimated cost per hospital admission during the first wave of COVID-19 in Europe ranged between EUR 25,018 among people with type 2 diabetes in good glycaemic control to EUR 57,244 among people with type 1 diabetes in poor glycaemic control, reflecting higher risk of intensive care, ventilator support and longer hospital stay according to diabetes category, while the corresponding cost for people without diabetes was estimated at EUR 16,993. The total direct costs of secondary care of COVID-19 in Europe were estimated at EUR 13.9 billion. Thus, 23.5% of the total costs accounted for treating people with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the importance of a greater focus on prevention and adequate treatment of diabetes and the need for special attention to avoid infection with COVID-19 to the extent possible among those already diagnosed with diabetes.