Direct health care costs associated with COVID-19 in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Data on the real-world health care burden of COVID-19 in the United States are limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare health care resource use (HRU), direct health care costs, and long-term COVID-19-related complications between patients with vs patients without COVID-19 diagnoses. METHODS: Using IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits administrative claims databases (January 1, 2018, to March 1, 2021), this retrospective, matched cohort study compared patients with a recorded COVID-19 diagnosis to control subjects with no recorded diagnosis for COVID-19, personal history of COVID-19, or pneumonia due to COVID-19. To capture typical health care utilization, the control group was analyzed in 2019 (prepandemic); their index date was assigned as 1 year before the index date (first observed COVID-19 diagnosis) of their matched COVID-19 patient. All patients had continuous health plan coverage for at least 6 months pre-index (baseline) and at least 6 months post-index (allowing censoring during month 6). Separately for commercial and Medicare cohorts, COVID-19 and control patients were matched 1:1 using propensity scores, number of followup months, and indicator of age 18 years or older. During each month of the 6-month follow-up, all-cause HRU, health care costs, and COVID-19-related complications were compared between patients with COVID-19 and controls. RESULTS: After matching COVID-19 and control patients 1:1, a total of 150,731 commercial matched pairs and 1,862 Medicare matched pairs were retained; baseline characteristics were similar between patients with COVID-19 and controls. Patients with COVID-19 and controls had mean ages of 38.9 and 39.7 years in the commercial cohort and 74.3 and 75.3 years in the Medicare cohort, respectively. In month 1 of follow-up, patients with COVID-19 relative to controls were significantly more likely to have at least 1 inpatient admission (commercial: 6.9% vs 0.5%; Medicare: 29.1% vs 1.3%; both P < 0.001) and at least 1 emergency department visit (commercial: 37.3% vs 3.4%; Medicare: 26.2% vs 4.1%; both P < 0.001). Total health care costs in month 1 were significantly higher among patients with COVID-19 than controls (mean differences: $3,706 for commercial; $10,595 for Medicare; both P < 0.001), driven by inpatient costs. Though the incremental HRU and cost burden of COVID-19 decreased over time, patients with COVID-19 continued to have significantly higher total costs through month 5 (all P < 0.001 for both commercial and Medicare). During follow-up, patients with COVID-19 had significantly higher rates of complications than controls (commercial: 52.8% vs 29.0% with any; Medicare: 74.5% vs 47.9% with any; both P < 0.001), most commonly cough, dyspnea, and fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 was associated with significant economic and clinical burden, both in the short-term and over 6 months following diagnosis. DISCLOSURES: Jessica K DeMartino is an employee of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. Elyse Swallow, Debbie Goldschmidt, Karen Yang, Marta Viola, Tyler Radtke, and Noam Kirson are employees of Analysis Group, Inc., which has received consulting fees from Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. This study was funded by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. The sponsor was involved in the study design, interpretation of the results, manuscript review, and the decision to publish the article.

Factors associated with delaying medical care: cross-sectional study of Nebraska adults.

BACKGROUND: Delayed medical care may result in adverse health outcomes and increased cost. Our purpose was to identify factors associated with delayed medical care in a primarily rural state. METHODS: Using a stratified random sample of 5,300 Nebraska households, we conducted a cross-sectional mailed survey with online response option (27 October 2020 to 8 March 2021) in English and Spanish. Multiple logistic regression models calculated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 20.8% (n = 1,101). Approximately 37.8% of Nebraskans ever delayed healthcare (cost-related 29.7%, transportation-related 3.7%), with 22.7% delaying care in the past year (10.1% cost-related). Cost-related ever delay was associated with younger age [< 45 years aOR 6.17 (3.24-11.76); 45-64 years aOR 2.36 (1.29-4.32)], low- and middle-income [< $50,000 aOR 2.85 (1.32-6.11); $50,000-$74,999 aOR 3.06 (1.50-6.23)], and no health insurance [aOR 3.56 (1.21-10.49)]. Transportation delays were associated with being non-White [aOR 8.07 (1.54-42.20)], no bachelor's degree [≤ high school aOR 3.06 (1.02-9.18); some college aOR 4.16 (1.32-13.12)], and income < $50,000 [aOR 8.44 (2.18-32.63)]. Those who did not have a primary care provider were 80% less likely to have transportation delays [aOR 0.20 (0.05-0.80)]. CONCLUSIONS: Delayed care affects more than one-third of Nebraskans, primarily due to financial concerns, and impacting low- and middle-income families. Transportation-related delays are associated with more indicators of low socio-economic status. Policies targeting minorities and those with low- and middle-income, such as Medicaid expansion, would contribute to addressing disparities resulting from delayed care.

Direct Medical Costs Associated With Post-COVID-19 Conditions Among Privately Insured Children and Adults.

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, has caused more than 100.2 million infections and more than 1 million deaths in the US as of November 2022, yet information on the economic burden associated with post-COVID-19 conditions is lacking. We estimated the possible economic burden associated with post-COVID-19 conditions by comparing direct medical costs among patients younger than 65 years with and without COVID-19 in the postacute period. METHODS: Commercially insured children and adults with a COVID-19 diagnosis (cases) during April-August 2020 were matched to those without COVID-19 (controls) on a 1:4 ratio. Direct medical costs represented 1-, 3-, and 6-month total expenditures per person starting 31 days after the diagnosis date. We used a 2-part model to evaluate cost differences among individuals with and without COVID-19, adjusted for patient characteristics. RESULTS: Costs were higher among cases compared with controls. Direct medical costs among child cases were 1.82, 1.72, and 1.70 times higher than controls over 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively. Direct medical costs among adult cases were 1.69, 1.54, and 1.46 times higher than costs among controls over 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively. Relative differences in costs were highest among adults aged 50 to 64 years. In a subset of people with COVID-19, costs were higher among hospitalized cases compared with nonhospitalized cases. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a considerable economic burden of COVID-19 even after the resolution of acute illness, highlighting the importance of prevention and mitigation measures to reduce the economic impact of COVID-19 on the US health care system.

Risk factors, health outcomes, healthcare services utilization, and direct medical costs of patients with long COVID.

OBJECTIVES: Data on the economic burden of long COVID are scarce. We aimed to examine the prevalence and medical costs of treating long COVID. METHODS: We conducted this historical cohort study using data from patients with COVID-19 among members of a large health provider in Israel. Cases were defined according to physician diagnosis (definite long COVID) or suggestive symptoms given ≥ 4 weeks from infection (probable cases). Healthcare resource utilization and direct healthcare costs (HCCs) in the period before infection and afterward were compared across study groups. RESULTS: Between March 2020, and March 2021, a total of 180,759 COVID-19 patients (mean [SD] age = 32.9 years [19.0 years]; 89,665 [49.6%] females) were identified. Overall, 14,088 (7.8%) individuals developed long COVID (mean [SD] age = 40.0 years [19.0 years]; 52.4% females). Among them, 1477(10.5%) were definite long COVID and 12,611(89.5%) were defined as probable long COVID. Long COVID was associated with age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.058 per year, 95% CI: 1.053-1.063), female sex (AOR = 1.138; 95% CI: 1.098-1.180), smoking (AOR = 1.532; 95% CI: 1.358-1.727), and symptomatic acute phase (AOR = 1.178; 95% CI: 1.133-1.224), primarily muscle pain and cough. Hypertension was an important risk factor for long COVID among younger adults. Compared with patients with non-long COVID, definite and probable cases were associated with AORs of 2.47 (2.22-2.75) and 1.76 (1.68-1.84) for post-COVID hospitalization, respectively. Although among patients with non-long COVID HCCs decreased from $1400 during 4 months before the infection to $1021 and among patients with long COVID, HCCs increased from $2435 to $2810. CONCLUSION: Long COVID is associated with a substantial increase in the utilization of healthcare services and direct medical costs. Our findings underline the need for timely planning and allocating resources for patient-centered care for patients with long COVID as well as for its secondary prevention in high-risk patients.

Dimethyl fumarate is associated with lower rates of infection and lower infection-related healthcare costs when compared with ocrelizumab.

BACKGROUND: Infections in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) may have a detrimental effect on disease progression, risk of hospitalization, and healthcare resource utilization (HRU). The infection risk and HRU costs may vary between disease-modifying therapies (DMTs); however, the individual risks and differences associated with DMTs are not well characterized. Some DMTs may increase the risk for infections in PwMS; however, previous studies have reported an intact humoral immune response in dimethyl fumarate (DMF)-treated patients. The objective was to compare infection-related HRU and healthcare costs (HCCs) between PwMS treated with DMF or ocrelizumab (OCR). METHODS: Eligible patients were identified from the Optum US claims database between April 2017 and September 2020 (DMF n = 1429; OCR n = 3170). Patients were followed from index date to first occurrence of: (1) end of study, (2) end of insurance eligibility, (3) discontinuation of index DMT, or (4) switch from index DMT to another DMT. Outcomes were annualized rate of infection encounters (defined as infection encounters [n] during follow-up window / days followed [n] × 365); annualized infection-related HCCs (defined as aggregated costs of infection encounters during follow-up window / days followed [n] × 365); location-specific infections, and overall infection-related events. Propensity score matching (PSM) 1:1 method was used; PS was calculated via logistic regression for probability of DMF treatment conditional on demographics and comorbidities. Mean differences (MD) were reported for infection encounter measures. RESULTS: After PSM, DMF and OCR cohorts (n = 1094 in each cohort) were balanced based on baseline characteristics (standardized MD of adjusted baseline characteristics <0.1). Mean (standard deviation) follow-up was 296 (244) days for DMF patients and 297 (243) for OCR patients. DMF patients experienced lower annualized rates of overall infection encounters vs OCR patients (MD -0.51 [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.92 to -0.11], p = 0.01). When stratified by type of infection encounter, DMF patients experienced significantly lower annualized rates of outpatient (MD [95% CI]: -0.44 [-0.80 to -0.08], p = 0.02) and inpatient/hospitalization infection encounters (-0.08 [-0.14 to -0.02], p<0.01) vs OCR patients. A trend towards a shorter duration of infection-related hospitalization in the DMF vs the OCR group was observed (MD [95% CI]: -2.20 [-4.73 to 0.26] days, p = 0.08). The most common infection types in both DMT groups were urinary tract infections, sepsis, and pneumonia. DMF patients experienced lower annualized infection-related HCCs (MD [95% CI]: -$3642 [-$6380 to -$904], p < 0.01) vs OCR patients, which were driven largely by infection-related hospitalization costs (-$3639 [-$6019 to -$1259], p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: DMF-treated patients PS-matched with OCR patients experienced lower annualized rates of infection encounters and lower infection-related HCCs.

Economic Burden of the 2020 COVID-19 Hospitalizations in Spain.

This economic evaluation reports the total and per patient costs of inpatient care for COVID-19 in Spain in 2020.

Impact of direct-acting antiviral use for chronic hepatitis C on health care costs in Medicaid: economic model update.

Curative direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C provide a net economic benefit to Medicaid in less than 1 year. Cumulative savings to date have exceeded $15 billion.

[The experience of Japan: the application of the intersectoral balance methodology to control health care costs as a factor of mobilization readiness of health care to COVID-19 pandemic].

One of possible reasons for success of Japan in confronting the COVID-19 pandemic (low mortality rates, refusal of hard lock-downs and relatively low fall in economy) is seen in record high (3-4 times higher than in most other developed countries) provision of hospital beds. Its financing was supported during first 2 decades of the XXI century by the policy of relative to GDP advanced growth of public health public expenditures based on assessment of multiplier impact of these expenditures on demand, production and employment in other sectors of the economy using the intersectoral balance method based on "input-output" tables.Purpose of the study is to analyze Japan's economic policy in managing budgetary health care costs.The comprehensive statistical, comparative and retrospective analysis of available data was applied.The study results permit to suggest that high provision of the Japan population with hospital care resources and low mortality rates in 2022 prior to development of vaccines and effective treatment schemes for COVID-19 can be explained, among other things, by long-term policy of managing health care costs using assessment of their effect on production growth, demand and employment in other economy sectors using intersectoral balance method based on regular compilation of "input-output" tables.The data obtained permits to characterize as promising approach of the Japanese government to management of health care costs using assessment of their effect on production growth, demand and employment in other sectors of the economy using intersectoral balance method based on the regular compilation of "input-output" tables. This approach permitted to increase up to 1.5 times health care costs during 2005-2018 in situation of chronic stagnation of the national economy and thus to avoid world-wide trend towards reduction of hospital bed stock and after the start of pandemic severe shortage of hospital beds. The positive experience of Japan is confirmed by encouraging results of 2 pilot projects in the EU countries on applying the intersectoral balance method to assess the multiplier effect of health care costs in 2017-2018. It is considered that using the experience of Japan in managing budgetary health care expenditures through intersectoral balance method is challenging.

Digital Health Applications to Establish a Remote Diagnosis of Orthopedic Knee Disorders: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Knee pain is highly prevalent worldwide, and this number is expected to rise in the future. The COVID-19 outbreak, in combination with the aging population, rising health care costs, and the need to make health care more accessible worldwide, has led to an increasing demand for digital health care applications to deliver care for patients with musculoskeletal conditions. Digital health and other forms of telemedicine can add value in optimizing health care for patients and health care providers. This might reduce health care costs and make health care more accessible while maintaining a high level of quality. Although expectations are high, there is currently no overview comparing digital health applications with face-to-face contact in clinical trials to establish a primary knee diagnosis in orthopedic surgery. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the currently available digital health and telemedicine applications to establish a primary knee diagnosis in orthopedic surgery in the general population in comparison with imaging or face-to-face contact between patients and physicians. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted using the PubMed and Embase databases according to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) statement. The inclusion criteria were studies reporting methods to determine a primary knee diagnosis in orthopedic surgery using digital health or telemedicine. On April 28 and 29, 2021, searches were conducted in PubMed (MEDLINE) and Embase. Data charting was conducted using a predefined form and included details on general study information, study population, type of application, comparator, analyses, and key findings. A risk-of-bias analysis was not deemed relevant considering the scoping review design of the study. RESULTS: After screening 5639 articles, 7 (0.12%) were included. In total, 2 categories to determine a primary diagnosis were identified: screening studies (4/7, 57%) and decision support studies (3/7, 43%). There was great heterogeneity in the included studies in algorithms used, disorders, input parameters, and outcome measurements. No more than 25 knee disorders were included in the studies. The included studies showed a relatively high sensitivity (67%-91%). The accuracy of the different studies was generally lower, with a specificity of 27% to 48% for decision support studies and 73% to 96% for screening studies. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review shows that there are a limited number of available applications to establish a remote diagnosis of knee disorders in orthopedic surgery. To date, there is limited evidence that digital health applications can assist patients or orthopedic surgeons in establishing the primary diagnosis of knee disorders. Future research should aim to integrate multiple sources of information and a standardized study design with close collaboration among clinicians, data scientists, data managers, lawyers, and service users to create reliable and secure databases.

Cost of Illness of COVID-19 and Its Consequences on Health and Economic System.

The outbreak of COVID-19 has had destructive influences on social and economic systems as well as many aspects of human life. In this study, we aimed to estimate the economic effects of COVID-19 at the individual and societal levels during a fiscal year. This cost of illness analysis was used to estimate the economic burden of COVID-19 in Iran. Data of the COVID-19 patients referred to the hospitals affiliated to Bushehr University of Medical Sciences in 2021 were collected through the Hospital Information System (HIS). The study methodology was based upon the human capital approach and bottom-up technique. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in 9711 confirmed hospital cases and 717 deaths in Bushehr province during the study period. The direct and indirect costs were estimated to be $1446.06 and $3081.44 per patient. The economic burden for the province and country was estimated to be $43.97 and $2680.88 million. The results showed that the economic burden of this disease particularly premature death costs is remarkably high. Therefore, in order to increase the resiliency of the health system and the stability in service delivery, preventive-oriented strategies have to be more seriously considered by policymakers.

Analysis of Healthcare Costs Incurred in Regional Hospitals in Andalusia (Spain) during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

(1) Background: The global health crisis caused by the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has led to extreme overloading of different public healthcare systems worldwide. The Spanish Public Healthcare System is one of them. This study aimed to conduct a comparative cost analysis to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on small- and medium-sized regional hospitals in Andalusia (Spain). (2) Methods: This comparative, multicentre, observational, and retrospective study was designed to perform a comparative cost analysis between the Alto Guadalquivir Health Agency (AGHA) and Poniente University Hospital (PUH), both of which belong to the Spanish Public Health System (PHS). The data included in this study corresponds to the total costs by area and year incurred by the 61,335 patients from both healthcare institutions (AGHA = 36,110; PUH = 25,225) in the areas of hospital emergency service (HES), hospitalisation, and intensive care unit (ICU), during the 24 months of the study period (from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020). (3) Results: The analysis results showed a significant increase in costs incurred in 2020 for HES relative to those incurred in 2019 for both AGHA (+14%; p < 0.003) and PUH (+36%; p = 0.002). Additionally, costs incurred for ICU increased significantly in 2020 relative to those incurred in 2019 for both AGHA (+30%; p = 0.003) and PUH (+46%; p = 0.002). Hospitalisation costs for AGHA also increased significantly (+9%; p < 0.012) in 2020 versus those obtained in 2019; however, no significant differences were found for PUH (+6%; p = 1) in the same period analysed. However, the number of patients treated in the areas of HES, hospitalisation, and ICU was significantly reduced throughout 2020 compared to 2019. (4) Conclusions: Our findings show that the costs incurred during 2020 in the regional hospitals of Andalusia (Spain) increased significantly in most of the parameters analysed relative to those incurred in the year before the pandemic (i.e., 2019).

A Comprehensive Report of German Nationwide Inpatient Data on the Post-COVID-19 Syndrome Including Annual Direct Healthcare Costs.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive overview of German nationwide data including (i) the number of hospitalized Post-COVID Syndrome (PCS) cases including in-hospital mortality rates and intensive care unit treatments, (ii) the main common concomitant diagnoses associated with PCS, (iii) the most frequently performed treatment procedures, and (iv) the annual direct healthcare costs. METHODS: The incidence was calculated based on annual ICD-10 diagnosis codes "U09.9!, Post-COVID-19 condition". Data on concomitant diagnoses, treatment procedures, treatment in an intensive care unit (ICU), in-hospital mortality, the proportion of G-DRGs, and cumulative costs were assessed based on the Institute for the Hospital Remuneration System (InEK) data for 2019. RESULTS: A total of 29,808 PCS inpatients could be identified yielding a prevalence of 5.5%. In total, 1330 (4.5%) in-hospital deaths were recorded, and 5140 (17.2%) patients required ICU treatment. The majority of patients (18.6%) were aged 65-74 years. The most common concomitant diagnoses included pneumonia, critical illness polyneuropathy, dyspnea, chronic fatigue syndrome, and pulmonary embolisms. The most frequently performed procedures were computed tomography of the thorax with contrast medium, whole-body plethysmography, and the monitoring of respiration, heart, and circulation. The cost per case of the G-DRG codes that were analyzed ranged from € 620 ± 377 (E64D, Respiratory insufficiency, one day of occupancy) to € 113,801 ± 27,939 (A06B, Ventilation > 1799 h with complex OR procedure). Total cumulative direct healthcare costs of € 136,608,719 were calculated, resulting in mean costs of € 4583 per case. CONCLUSION: Post-COVID Syndrome is of major public health importance with substantial financial implications. The present article can support stakeholders in health care systems to foresee future needs and adapt their resource management. Consensus diagnostic criteria and rehabilitation guidelines are highly warranted.

Acute Muscle Mass Loss Predicts Long-Term Fatigue, Myalgia, and Health Care Costs in COVID-19 Survivors.

OBJECTIVE: We examined the impact of loss of skeletal muscle mass in post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospital readmission rate, self-perception of health, and health care costs in a cohort of COVID-19 survivors. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Tertiary Clinical Hospital. Eighty COVID-19 survivors age 59 ± 14 years were prospectively assessed. METHODS: Handgrip strength and vastus lateralis muscle cross-sectional area were evaluated at hospital admission, discharge, and 6 months after discharge. Post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 were evaluated 6 months after discharge (main outcome). Also, health care costs, hospital readmission rate, and self-perception of health were evaluated 2 and 6 months after hospital discharge. To examine whether the magnitude of muscle mass loss impacts the outcomes, we ranked patients according to relative vastus lateralis muscle cross-sectional area reduction during hospital stay into either "high muscle loss" (-18 ± 11%) or "low muscle loss" (-4 ± 2%) group, based on median values. RESULTS: High muscle loss group showed greater prevalence of fatigue (76% vs 46%, P = .0337) and myalgia (66% vs 36%, P = .0388), and lower muscle mass (-8% vs 3%, P < .0001) than low muscle loss group 6 months after discharge. No between-group difference was observed for hospital readmission and self-perceived health (P > .05). High muscle loss group demonstrated greater total COVID-19-related health care costs 2 ($77,283.87 vs. $3057.14, P = .0223, respectively) and 6 months ($90,001.35 vs $12, 913.27, P = .0210, respectively) after discharge vs low muscle loss group. Muscle mass loss was shown to be a predictor of total COVID-19-related health care costs at 2 (adjusted ß = $10, 070.81, P < .0001) and 6 months after discharge (adjusted ß = $9885.63, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: COVID-19 survivors experiencing high muscle mass loss during hospital stay fail to fully recover muscle health. In addition, greater muscle loss was associated with a higher frequency of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 and greater total COVID-19-related health care costs 2 and 6 months after discharge. Altogether, these data suggest that the loss of muscle mass resulting from COVID-19 hospitalization may incur in an economical burden to health care systems.

Estimating treatment costs for uncomplicated diabetes at a hospital serving refugees in Kenya.

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is increasing markedly in low- and middle-income countries where over three-quarters of global deaths occur due to non-communicable diseases. Unfortunately, these conditions are considered costly and often deprioritized in humanitarian settings with competing goals. Using a mixed methods approach, this study aimed to quantify the cost of outpatient treatment for uncomplicated type-1 (T1DM) and type-2 (T2DM) diabetes at a secondary care facility serving refugees in Kenya. A retrospective cost analysis combining micro- and gross-costings from a provider perspective was employed. The main outcomes included unit costs per health service activity to cover the total cost of labor, capital, medications and consumables, and overheads. A care pathway was mapped out for uncomplicated diabetes patients to identify direct and indirect medical costs. Interviews were conducted to determine inputs required for diabetes care and estimate staff time allocation. A total of 360 patients, predominantly Somali refugees, were treated for T2DM (92%, n = 331) and T1DM (8%, n = 29) in 2017. Of the 3,140 outpatient consultations identified in 2017; 48% (n = 1,522) were for males and 52% (n = 1,618) for females. A total of 56,144 tests were run in the setting, of which 9,512 (16.94%) were Random Blood Sugar (RBS) tests, and 90 (0.16%) HbA1c tests. Mean costs were estimated as: $2.58 per outpatient consultation, $1.37 per RBS test and $14.84 per HbA1c test. The annual pharmacotherapy regimens cost $91.93 for T1DM and $20.34 for T2DM. Investment in holistic and sustainable non-communicable disease management should be at the forefront of humanitarian response. It is expected to be beneficial with immediate implications on the COVID-19 response while also reducing the burden of care over time. Despite study limitations, essential services for the management of uncomplicated diabetes in a humanitarian setting can be modest and affordable. Therefore, integrating diabetes care into primary health care should be a fundamental pillar of long-term policy response by stakeholders.

Costs of Persons with Dementia Living in Nursing Homes in The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Disease modifying treatments (DMTs) currently under development for Alzheimer's disease, have the potential to prevent or postpone institutionalization and more expensive care and might delay institutionalization of persons with dementia. OBJECTIVE: The current study estimates costs of living in a nursing home for persons with dementia in the Netherlands to help inform economic evaluations of future DMTs. METHODS: Data were collected during semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals and from the financial administration of a healthcare organization with several nursing homes. Personnel costs were calculated using a bottom-up approach by valuing the time estimates. Non-personnel costs were calculated using information from the financial administration of the healthcare organization. RESULTS: Total costs of a person with dementia per 24 hours, including both care staff and other healthcare providers, were € 151 for small-scale living wards and € 147 for independent living wards. Non-personnel costs were € 37 per day. CONCLUSION: This study provides Dutch estimates for total healthcare costs per day for institutionalized persons with dementia. These cost estimates can be used in cost-effectiveness analyses for future DMTs in dementia.

Initial health care costs for COVID-19 in British Columbia and Ontario, Canada: an interprovincial population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 imposed substantial health and economic burdens. Comprehensive population-based estimates of health care costs for COVID-19 are essential for planning and policy evaluation. We estimated publicly funded health care costs in 2 Canadian provinces during the pandemic's first wave. METHODS: In this historical cohort study, we linked patients with their first positive SARS-CoV-2 test result by June 30, 2020, in 2 Canadian provinces (British Columbia and Ontario) to health care administrative databases and matched to negative or untested controls. We stratified patients by highest level of initial care: community, long-term care, hospital (without admission to the intensive care unit [ICU]) and ICU. Mean publicly funded health care costs for patients and controls, mean net (attributable to COVID-19) costs and total costs were estimated from 30 days before to 120 days after the index date, or to July 31, 2020, in 30-day periods for patients still being followed by the start of each period. RESULTS: We identified 2465 matched people with a positive test result for SARS-CoV-2 in BC and 28 893 in Ontario. Mean age was 53.4 (standard deviation [SD] 21.8) years (BC) and 53.7 (SD 22.7) years (Ontario); 55.7% (BC) and 56.1% (Ontario) were female. Net costs in the first 30 days after the index date were $22 010 (95% confidence interval [CI] 19 512 to 24 509) and $15 750 (95% CI 15 354 to 16 147) for patients admitted to hospital, and $65 828 (95% CI 58 535 to 73 122) and $56 088 (95% CI 53 721 to 58 455) for ICU patients in BC and Ontario, respectively. In the community and long-term care settings, net costs were near 0. Total costs for all people, from 30 days before to 30 days after the index date, were $22 128 330 (BC) and $175 778 210 (Ontario). INTERPRETATION: During the first wave, we found that mean costs attributable to COVID-19 were highest for patients with ICU admission and higher in BC than Ontario. Reducing the number of people who acquire COVID-19 and severity of illness are required to mitigate the economic impact of COVID-19.

Clinical outcomes and health care costs among people entering a safer opioid supply program in Ontario.

BACKGROUND: London InterCommunity Health Centre (LIHC) launched a safer opioid supply (SOS) program in 2016, where clients are prescribed pharmaceutical opioids and provided with comprehensive health and social supports. We sought to evaluate the impact of this program on health services utilization and health care costs. METHODS: We conducted an interrupted time series analysis of London, Ontario, residents who received a diagnosis of opioid use disorder (OUD) and who entered the SOS program between January 2016 and March 2019, and a comparison group of individuals matched on demographic and clinical characteristics who were not exposed to the program. Primary outcomes were emergency department (ED) visits, hospital admissions, admissions for infections and health care costs. We used autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) models to evaluate the impact of SOS initiation and compared outcome rates in the year before and after cohort entry. RESULTS: In the time series analysis, rates of ED visits (-14 visits/100, 95% confidence interval [CI] -26 to -2; p = 0.02), hospital admissions (-5 admissions/100, 95% CI -9 to -2; p = 0.005) and health care costs not related to primary care or outpatient medications (-$922/person, 95% CI -$1577 to -$268; p = 0.008) declined significantly after entry into the SOS program (n = 82), with no significant change in rates of infections (-1.6 infections/100, 95% CI -4.0 to 0.8; p = 0.2). In the year after cohort entry, the rate of ED visits (rate ratio [RR] 0.69, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.90), hospital admissions (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.74), admissions for incident infections (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.96) and total health care costs not related to primary care or outpatient medications ($15 635 v. $7310/person-year; p = 0.002) declined significantly among SOS clients compared with the year before. We observed no significant change in any of the primary outcomes among unexposed individuals (n = 303). INTERPRETATION: Although additional research is needed, this preliminary evidence indicates that SOS programs can play an important role in the expansion of treatment and harm-reduction options available to assist people who use drugs and who are at high risk of drug poisoning.

Cost-effectiveness of a whole-area testing pilot of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections with lateral flow devices: a modelling and economic analysis study.

BACKGROUND: Mass community testing for SARS-CoV-2 by lateral flow devices (LFDs) aims to reduce prevalence in the community. However its effectiveness as a public heath intervention is disputed. METHOD: Data from a mass testing pilot in the Borough of Merthyr Tydfil in late 2020 was used to model cases, hospitalisations, ICU admissions and deaths prevented. Further economic analysis with a healthcare perspective assessed cost-effectiveness in terms of healthcare costs avoided and QALYs gained. RESULTS: An initial conservative estimate of 360 (95% CI: 311-418) cases were prevented by the mass testing, representing a would-be reduction of 11% of all cases diagnosed in Merthyr Tydfil residents during the same period. Modelling healthcare burden estimates that 24 (16-36) hospitalizations, 5 (3-6) ICU admissions and 15 (11-20) deaths were prevented, representing 6.37%, 11.1% and 8.2%, respectively of the actual counts during the same period. A less conservative, best-case scenario predicts 2333 (1764-3115) cases prevented, representing 80% reduction in would-be cases. Cost -effectiveness analysis indicates 108 (80-143) QALYs gained, an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £2,143 (£860-£4,175) per QALY gained and net monetary benefit of £6.2 m (£4.5 m-£8.4 m). In the best-case scenario, this increases to £15.9 m (£12.3 m-£20.5 m). CONCLUSIONS: A non-negligible number of cases, hospitalisations and deaths were prevented by the mass testing pilot. Considering QALYs gained and healthcare costs avoided, the pilot was cost-effective. These findings suggest mass testing with LFDs in areas of high prevalence (> 2%) is likely to provide significant public health benefit. It is not yet clear whether similar benefits will be obtained in low prevalence settings or with vaccination rollout.