Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 28
Filter
1.
Pharmacol Res Perspect ; 10(2): e00931, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1782680

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to estimate healthcare costs and mortality associated with serious fluoroquinolone-related adverse reactions in Finland from 2008 to 2019. Serious adverse reaction types were identified from the Finnish Pharmaceutical Insurance Pool's pharmaceutical injury claims and the Finnish Medicines Agency's Adverse Reaction Register. A decision tree model was built to predict costs and mortality associated with serious adverse drug reactions (ADR). Severe clostridioides difficile infections, severe cutaneous adverse reactions, tendon ruptures, aortic ruptures, and liver injuries were included as serious adverse drug reactions in the model. Direct healthcare costs of a serious ADR were based on the number of reimbursed fluoroquinolone prescriptions from the Social Insurance Institution of Finland's database. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to address parameter uncertainty. A total of 1 831 537 fluoroquinolone prescriptions were filled between 2008 and 2019 in Finland, with prescription numbers declining 40% in recent years. Serious ADRs associated with fluoroquinolones lead to estimated direct healthcare costs of 501 938 402 €, including 11 405 ADRs and 3,884 deaths between 2008 and 2019. The average mortality risk associated with the use of fluoroquinolones was 0.21%. Severe clostridioides difficile infections were the most frequent, fatal, and costly serious ADRs associated with the use of fluoroquinolones. Although fluoroquinolones continue to be generally well-tolerated antimicrobials, serious adverse reactions cause long-term impairment to patients and high healthcare costs. Therefore, the risks and benefits should be weighed carefully in antibiotic prescription policies, as well as with individual patients.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Fluoroquinolones/adverse effects , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems/statistics & numerical data , Anti-Bacterial Agents/economics , Databases, Factual/statistics & numerical data , Decision Trees , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/economics , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/epidemiology , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/mortality , Finland , Fluoroquinolones/economics , Humans , Retrospective Studies
2.
PLoS One ; 17(1): e0260930, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1643241

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/economics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cost of Illness , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/economics , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Vaccines/economics , Capital Expenditures/statistics & numerical data , Ethiopia/epidemiology , Health Facilities , Humans , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Severity of Illness Index
3.
J Public Health Manag Pract ; 27(5): 492-500, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501235

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To examine levels of expenditure and needed investment in public health at the local level in the state of Ohio pre-COVID-19. DESIGN: Using detailed financial reporting from fiscal year (FY) 2018 from Ohio's local health departments (LHDs), we characterize spending by Foundational Public Health Services (FPHS). We also constructed estimates of the gap in public health spending in the state using self-reported gaps in service provision and a microsimulation approach. Data were collected between January and June 2019 and analyzed between June and September 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Eighty-four of the 113 LHDs in the state of Ohio covering a population of almost 9 million Ohioans. RESULTS: In FY2018, Ohio LHDs spent an average of $37 per capita on protecting and promoting the public's health. Approximately one-third of this investment supported the Foundational Areas (communicable disease control; chronic disease and injury prevention; environmental public health; maternal, child, and family health; and access to and linkages with health care). Another third supported the Foundational Capabilities, that is, the crosscutting skills and capacities needed to support all LHD activities. The remaining third supported programs and activities that are responsive to local needs and vary from community to community. To fully meet identified LHD needs in the state pre-COVID-19, Ohio would require an additional annual investment of $20 per capita on top of the current $37 spent per capita, or approximately $240 million for the state. CONCLUSIONS: A better understanding of the cost and value of public health services can educate policy makers so that they can make informed trade-offs when balancing health care, public health, and social services investments. The current environment of COVID-19 may dramatically increase need, making understanding and growing public health investment critical.


Subject(s)
Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Needs and Demand/economics , Public Health Practice/economics , Public Health/economics , COVID-19/economics , Financing, Government/economics , Humans , Local Government , Ohio
4.
Lancet Public Health ; 6(11): e848-e857, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1488025

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are associated with increased health risks across the life course. We aimed to estimate the annual health and financial burden of ACEs for 28 European countries. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Criminal Justice Databases, and Education Resources Information Center for quantitative studies (published Jan 1, 1990, to Sept 8, 2020) that reported prevalence of ACEs and risks of health outcomes associated with ACEs. Pooled relative risks were calculated for associations between ACEs and harmful alcohol use, smoking, illicit drug use, high body-mass index, depression, anxiety, interpersonal violence, cancer, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, stroke, and respiratory disease. Country-level ACE prevalence was calculated using available data. Country-level population attributable fractions (PAFs) due to ACEs were generated and applied to 2019 estimates of disability-adjusted life-years. Financial costs (US$ in 2019) were estimated using an adapted human capital approach. FINDINGS: In most countries, interpersonal violence had the largest PAFs due to ACEs (range 14·7-53·5%), followed by harmful alcohol use (15·7-45·0%), illicit drug use (15·2-44·9%), and anxiety (13·9%-44·8%). Harmful alcohol use, smoking, and cancer had the highest ACE-attributable costs in many countries. Total ACE-attributable costs ranged from $0·1 billion (Montenegro) to $129·4 billion (Germany) and were equivalent to between 1·1% (Sweden and Turkey) and 6·0% (Ukraine) of nations' gross domestic products. INTERPRETATION: Availability of ACE data varies widely between countries and country-level estimates cannot be directly compared. However, findings suggest ACEs are associated with major health and financial costs across European countries. The cost of not investing to prevent ACEs must be recognised, particularly as countries look to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, which interrupted services and education, and potentially increased risk factors for ACEs. FUNDING: WHO Regional Office for Europe.


Subject(s)
Adverse Childhood Experiences/economics , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Europe , Humans
5.
Pediatr Transplant ; 26(1): e14152, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1470453

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and consequent lockdowns, the use of telehealth interventions has rapidly increased both in the general population and among transplant recipients. Among pediatric transplant recipients, this most frequently takes the form of interventions on mobile devices, or mHealth, such as remote visits via video chat or phone, phone-based monitoring, and mobile apps. Telehealth interventions may offer the opportunity to provide care that minimizes many of the barriers of in-person care. METHODS: The present review followed the PRISMA guidelines. Sources up until October 2020 were initially identified through searches of PsycInfo® and PubMed® . RESULTS: We identified ten papers that reported findings from adult interventions and five studies based in pediatrics. Eight of the adult publications stemmed from the same two trials; within the pediatric subset, this was the case for two papers. Studies that have looked at mHealth interventions have found high acceptability rates over the short run, but there is a general lack of data on long-term use. CONCLUSIONS: The literature surrounding pediatric trials specifically is sparse with all findings referencing interventions that are in early stages of development, ranging from field tests to small feasibility trials. The lack of research highlights the need for a multi-center RCT that utilizes robust measures of medication adherence and other outcome variables, with longer-term follow-up before telehealth interventions should be fully embraced.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Services Accessibility , Organ Transplantation , Pediatrics/methods , Postoperative Care/methods , Telemedicine/methods , Adult , Attitude to Health , Canada , Child , Europe , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Pediatrics/economics , Pediatrics/trends , Postoperative Care/economics , Postoperative Care/trends , Telemedicine/economics , Telemedicine/trends , United States
6.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 17787, 2021 09 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1397899

ABSTRACT

Despite COVID-19's significant morbidity and mortality, considering cost-effectiveness of pharmacologic treatment strategies for hospitalized patients remains critical to support healthcare resource decisions within budgetary constraints. As such, we calculated the cost-effectiveness of using remdesivir and dexamethasone for moderate to severe COVID-19 respiratory infections using the United States health care system as a representative model. A decision analytic model modelled a base case scenario of a 60-year-old patient admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Patients requiring oxygen were considered moderate severity, and patients with severe COVID-19 required intubation with intensive care. Strategies modelled included giving remdesivir to all patients, remdesivir in only moderate and only severe infections, dexamethasone to all patients, dexamethasone in severe infections, remdesivir in moderate/dexamethasone in severe infections, and best supportive care. Data for the model came from the published literature. The time horizon was 1 year; no discounting was performed due to the short duration. The perspective was of the payer in the United States health care system. Supportive care for moderate/severe COVID-19 cost $11,112.98 with 0.7155 quality adjusted life-year (QALY) obtained. Using dexamethasone for all patients was the most-cost effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $980.84/QALY; all remdesivir strategies were more costly and less effective. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed dexamethasone for all patients was most cost-effective in 98.3% of scenarios. Dexamethasone for moderate-severe COVID-19 infections was the most cost-effective strategy and would have minimal budget impact. Based on current data, remdesivir is unlikely to be a cost-effective treatment for COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/therapy , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Health Care Rationing/economics , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adenosine Monophosphate/economics , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/economics , Alanine/therapeutic use , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/economics , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/virology , Clinical Decision-Making/methods , Computer Simulation , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Dexamethasone/economics , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Health Care Rationing/organization & administration , Humans , Intensive Care Units/economics , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Oxygen/administration & dosage , Oxygen/economics , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Respiration, Artificial/economics , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology
7.
J Child Psychol Psychiatry ; 62(7): 801-804, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1220022

ABSTRACT

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020, many governments have implemented national or regional lockdowns to slow the spread of infection. The widely anticipated negative impact these interventions would have on families, including on their mental health, were not included in decision models. The purpose of this editorial is, therefore, to stimulate debate by considering some of the barriers that have stopped governments setting the benefits of lockdown against, in particular, mental health costs during this process and so to make possible a more balanced approach going forward. First, evidence that lockdown causes mental health problems needs to be stronger. Natural experimental studies will play an essential role in providing such evidence. Second, innovative health economic approaches that allow the costs and benefits of lockdown to be compared directly are required. Third, we need to develop public health information strategies that allow more nuanced and complex messages that balance lockdown's costs and benefits to be communicated. These steps should be accompanied by a major public consultation/engagement campaign aimed at strengthening the publics' understanding of science and exploring beliefs about how to strike the appropriate balance between costs and benefits in public health intervention decisions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/economics , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Mental Health/economics , Quarantine/economics , Decision Making , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Value Health Reg Issues ; 24: 240-246, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1199117

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Vaccines are recognized as the most effective strategy for long-term prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) because they can reduce morbidity and mortality. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate willingness to pay (WTP) for a future COVID-19 vaccination among young adults in Southern Vietnam. METHODS: A cross-sectional, descriptive, and analytic study was undertaken with data collected from a community-based survey in southern Vietnam for 2 weeks in May 2020. The contingent valuation method was used to estimate WTP for COVID-19 vaccine. The average amount that respondents were willing to pay for the vaccine was US$ 85.9 2 ± 69.01. RESULTS: We also found the differences in WTP according to sex, living area, monthly income, and the level of self-rated risk of COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Our findings possibly contribute to the implementation of a pricing policy when the COVID-19 vaccine is introduced in Vietnam.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/economics , Health Expenditures/standards , Immunization/economics , Patients/psychology , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Care Costs/standards , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Health Expenditures/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Immunization/methods , Male , Middle Aged , Patients/statistics & numerical data , Vietnam
9.
Milbank Q ; 99(2): 519-541, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1158074

ABSTRACT

Policy Points An estimated 700,000 people in the United States have "long COVID," that is, symptoms of COVID-19 persisting beyond three weeks. COVID-19 and its long-term sequelae are strongly influenced by social determinants such as poverty and by structural inequalities such as racism and discrimination. Primary care providers are in a unique position to provide and coordinate care for vulnerable patients with long COVID. Policy measures should include strengthening primary care, optimizing data quality, and addressing the multiple nested domains of inequity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Health Status Disparities , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Social Determinants of Health , COVID-19/economics , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/physiopathology , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Poverty , Racism , United States/epidemiology
10.
Alzheimers Dement ; 17(3): 327-406, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1147550

ABSTRACT

This article describes the public health impact of Alzheimer's disease (AD), including incidence and prevalence, mortality and morbidity, use and costs of care, and the overall impact on caregivers and society. The Special Report discusses the challenges of providing equitable health care for people with dementia in the United States. An estimated 6.2 million Americans age 65 and older are living with Alzheimer's dementia today. This number could grow to 13.8 million by 2060 barring the development of medical breakthroughs to prevent, slow or cure AD. Official death certificates recorded 121,499 deaths from AD in 2019, the latest year for which data are available, making Alzheimer's the sixth-leading cause of death in the United States and the fifth-leading cause of death among Americans age 65 and older. Between 2000 and 2019, deaths from stroke, heart disease and HIV decreased, whereas reported deaths from AD increased more than 145%. This trajectory of deaths from AD was likely exacerbated in 2020 by the COVID-19 pandemic. More than 11 million family members and other unpaid caregivers provided an estimated 15.3 billion hours of care to people with Alzheimer's or other dementias in 2020. These figures reflect a decline in the number of caregivers compared with a decade earlier, as well as an increase in the amount of care provided by each remaining caregiver. Unpaid dementia caregiving was valued at $256.7 billion in 2020. Its costs, however, extend to family caregivers' increased risk for emotional distress and negative mental and physical health outcomes - costs that have been aggravated by COVID-19. Average per-person Medicare payments for services to beneficiaries age 65 and older with AD or other dementias are more than three times as great as payments for beneficiaries without these conditions, and Medicaid payments are more than 23 times as great. Total payments in 2021 for health care, long-term care and hospice services for people age 65 and older with dementia are estimated to be $355 billion. Despite years of efforts to make health care more equitable in the United States, racial and ethnic disparities remain - both in terms of health disparities, which involve differences in the burden of illness, and health care disparities, which involve differences in the ability to use health care services. Blacks, Hispanics, Asian Americans and Native Americans continue to have a higher burden of illness and lower access to health care compared with Whites. Such disparities, which have become more apparent during COVID-19, extend to dementia care. Surveys commissioned by the Alzheimer's Association recently shed new light on the role of discrimination in dementia care, the varying levels of trust between racial and ethnic groups in medical research, and the differences between groups in their levels of concern about and awareness of Alzheimer's disease. These findings emphasize the need to increase racial and ethnic diversity in both the dementia care workforce and in Alzheimer's clinical trials.


Subject(s)
Alzheimer Disease/epidemiology , Public Health/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Alzheimer Disease/economics , Alzheimer Disease/mortality , Alzheimer Disease/therapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , Cause of Death , Comorbidity , Cost of Illness , Female , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Needs and Demand/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Incidence , Male , Prevalence , Risk Factors , Sex Factors , Survival Analysis , United States
11.
Value Health ; 24(5): 632-640, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1121933

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the overall quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained by averting 1 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection over the duration of the pandemic. METHODS: A cohort-based probabilistic simulation model, informed by the latest epidemiological estimates on COVID-19 in the United States provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and literature review. Heterogeneity of parameter values across age group was accounted for. The main outcome studied was QALYs for the infected patient, patient's family members, and the contagion effect of the infected patient over the duration of the pandemic. RESULTS: Averting a COVID-19 infection in a representative US resident will generate an additional 0.061 (0.016-0.129) QALYs (for the patient: 0.055, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.014-0.115; for the patient's family members: 0.006, 95% CI 0.002-0.015). Accounting for the contagion effect of this infection, and assuming that an effective vaccine will be available in 3 months, the total QALYs gains from averting 1 single infection is 1.51 (95% CI 0.28-4.37) accrued to patients and their family members affected by the index infection and its sequelae. These results were robust to most parameter values and were most influenced by effective reproduction number, probability of death outside the hospital, the time-varying hazard rates of hospitalization, and death in critical care. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the health benefits of averting 1 COVID-19 infection in the United States are substantial. Efforts to curb infections must weigh the costs against these benefits.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Preventive Medicine/standards , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Health Care Costs/trends , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Preventive Medicine/economics , Preventive Medicine/methods , United States
12.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 21(1): 132, 2021 Feb 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1081721

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/economics , Cost of Illness , Absenteeism , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/economics , Hospitals, University/economics , Humans , Incidence , Income/statistics & numerical data , Iran/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Referral and Consultation , Young Adult
13.
Clin Obes ; 11(2): e12442, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1069385

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cost of Illness , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization , Obesity , Body Mass Index , COVID-19/economics , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Comorbidity , Europe/epidemiology , Female , Hospitalization/economics , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Obesity/diagnosis , Obesity/economics , Obesity/epidemiology , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
14.
Epidemiol Prev ; 44(5-6 Suppl 2): 408-422, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1068165

ABSTRACT

COVID has stirred up an information deluge that challenges our capacity to absorb and make sense of data. In this unrelenting flow of information, Africa has been largely off the radar, escaping the attention of the scientific literature and the media. International agencies have been the exception: despite the still low numbers of cases and deaths, they have voiced concerns, often in catastrophic terms, on the health, economic and social impacts of COVID in African countries. These concerns contrast sharply with the optimistic view that Africa may be spared the worst consequences of the pandemic.This paper provides a snapshot of a crisis in evolution: its features could change as new data become available and our understanding improves. The paper examines the epidemic trends, the health impact, the containment measures and their possible side effects. Africa has a long experience of responding to epidemics: relevant lessons learned are outlined. The picture of the epidemic and its narrative are heterogenous, given the differing vulnerabilities of African countries and the diverse contexts within their borders. The paper, therefore, singles out selected countries as illustrative of specific situations and advocates for a transnational and subnational approach to future analyses.The virus has shown a strong capacity to adapt; therefore, a response strategy, in order to be effective, needs to be flexible and able to adapt to changes. The paper concludes with the recommendation that affected communities should be engaged in the response, to maintain or build trust. A lesson from the Ebola outbreak of a few years ago was that epidemiologists and community leaders learned, after initial difficulties, how to dialogue and work together.A summary update of the pandemic has been added, in view of its fast evolution.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Africa South of the Sahara/epidemiology , Bibliometrics , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/economics , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Testing/statistics & numerical data , Communicable Disease Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Communicable Disease Control/statistics & numerical data , Developing Countries , Government Programs/statistics & numerical data , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Accessibility , Hemorrhagic Fever, Ebola/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Medically Underserved Area , Models, Theoretical , Procedures and Techniques Utilization , Quarantine , Social Change
15.
Aust Health Rev ; 45(1): 12-13, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1054102

ABSTRACT

The quality adjusted life year (QALY) as a basis of valuing additional expenditure on health is widely accepted. Although early in the COVID-19 pandemic, several commentators called for a similar approach in resolving trade-offs between economic activity and reducing the burden of COVID-19, this has not occurred. The value of a QALY has not been used to deny all intervention, as the rule of rescue attests. Further, while there was no other way of managing the pandemic, there were other means available to mitigate the economic losses. Now that vaccine programs have commenced in several countries, it is interesting to consider whether economic evaluation should now be applied. However, the recognised complexities of the evaluation of vaccines, plus the challenge of measuring opportunity costs in the face of an economic recession and the severity of the consequences of an outbreak even though the probability of transmission is exceedingly low, mean its use will be restricted. COVID-19 has changed everything, even the way we should think about economic evaluation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/economics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cost-Benefit Analysis/statistics & numerical data , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/economics , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Australia/epidemiology , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
16.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 17(20)2020 10 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-983061

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/economics , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Aged , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/economics , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics/economics , Pneumonia, Viral/economics , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology , Survival Analysis
17.
Am J Trop Med Hyg ; 104(2): 436-440, 2020 Dec 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-955246

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has created an unprecedented health crisis and a substantial socioeconomic impact. It also affects tuberculosis (TB) control severely worldwide. Interruptions of many TB control programs because of the COVID-19 pandemic could result in significant setbacks. One of the targets that can be affected is the WHO's End TB Strategy goal to eliminate catastrophic costs of TB-affected households by 2030. Disruptions to TB programs and healthcare services due to COVID-19 could potentially prolong diagnostic delays and worsen TB treatment adherence and outcomes. The economic recession caused by the pandemic could significantly impact household financial capacity because of the reduction of income and the rise in unemployment rates. All of these factors increase the risk of TB incidence and the gravity of economic impact on TB-affected households, and hamper efforts to eliminate catastrophic costs and control TB. Therefore, efforts to eliminate the incidence of TB-affected households facing catastrophic costs will be very challenging. Because financial constraint plays a significant role in TB control, the improvement of health and social protection systems is critical. Even before the pandemic, many TB-high-burden countries (HBCs) lacked robust health and social protection systems. These challenges highlight the substantial need for a more robust engagement of patients and civil society organizations and international support in addressing the consequences of COVID-19 on the control of TB.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/economics , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Tuberculosis/economics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Family Characteristics , Health Care Costs/standards , Health Care Costs/trends , Humans , Incidence , Income , SARS-CoV-2 , Tuberculosis/epidemiology , Tuberculosis/prevention & control
18.
J Drugs Dermatol ; 19(11): 1101-1108, 2020 Nov 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-941793

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Clinical and economic comparisons of therapies for plaque psoriasis are regularly updated following each new devel- opment in the field. With the recent availability of a novel accessory (Multi Micro DoseTM [MMD®] tip) for the 308nm excimer laser (XTRAC®, Strata Skin Sciences, Horsham, PA), which can determine and deliver an optimal therapeutic dose (OTDTM) of ultraviolet-B light in an improved protocol, the need for comparative health-economic assessment recurs. To this end, a comprehensive evaluation of treatment-related costs was undertaken from the payer perspective. Results show that outcomes are influenced by many factors; most importantly, the severity and extent of disease, treatment selection, and patient preference, as well as compliance, adherence, and persistence with care. Among study comparators, the 308nm excimer laser – XTRAC – with its latest MMD enhancement, is safe and delivers incremental clinical benefits with the potential for significant cost savings. These benefits are particularly relevant today in the context of SARS-CoV-2 virus and the COVid-19 pandemic. J Drugs Dermatol. 2020;19(11):1101-1108. doi:10.36849/JDD.2020.5510.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Psoriasis/therapy , COVID-19 , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , Lasers, Excimer/therapeutic use , Patient Compliance , Patient Preference , Psoriasis/economics , Psoriasis/pathology , Severity of Illness Index , Ultraviolet Therapy/economics , Ultraviolet Therapy/methods
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL