Evaluating the cost implications of integrating SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing for infection prevention and control investigation of nosocomial transmission within hospitals.

BACKGROUND: The COG-UK hospital-onset COVID-19 infection (HOCI) trial evaluated the impact of SARS-CoV-2 whole-genome sequencing (WGS) on acute infection, prevention, and control (IPC) investigation of nosocomial transmission within hospitals. AIM: To estimate the cost implications of using the information from the sequencing reporting tool (SRT), used to determine likelihood of nosocomial infection in IPC practice. METHODS: A micro-costing approach for SARS-CoV-2 WGS was conducted. Data on IPC management resource use and costs were collected from interviews with IPC teams from 14 participating sites and used to assign cost estimates for IPC activities as collected in the trial. Activities included IPC-specific actions following a suspicion of healthcare-associated infection (HAI) or outbreak, as well as changes to practice following the return of data via SRT. FINDINGS: The mean per-sample costs of SARS-CoV-2 sequencing were estimated at £77.10 for rapid and £66.94 for longer turnaround phases. Over the three-month interventional phases, the total management costs of IPC-defined HAIs and outbreak events across the sites were estimated at £225,070 and £416,447, respectively. The main cost drivers were bed-days lost due to ward closures because of outbreaks, followed by outbreak meetings and bed-days lost due to cohorting contacts. Actioning SRTs, the cost of HAIs increased by £5,178 due to unidentified cases and the cost of outbreaks decreased by £11,246 as SRTs excluded hospital outbreaks. CONCLUSION: Although SARS-CoV-2 WGS adds to the total IPC management cost, additional information provided could balance out the additional cost, depending on identified design improvements and effective deployment.

A pilot randomised controlled trial of befriending by volunteers in people with intellectual disability and depressive symptoms.

BACKGROUND: People with intellectual disability (ID) are more likely to experience chronic depression compared with the general population, which may be compounded by loneliness and lower levels of social support. Befriending aims to provide social support and promote engagement in community activities. No randomised controlled trials have examined whether befriending improves symptoms of depression and social outcomes in people with ID. The aim of this pilot trial was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a future larger trial of one-to-one befriending by volunteers in people with ID and depressive symptoms. METHODS: Participants were adults with mild or moderate ID with a score of 5 or more on the Glasgow Depression Scale for People with Learning Disabilities (GDS-LD). They were randomised to the intervention arm (matched to a volunteer befriender for 6 months) or the control arm (usual care). Volunteers received training and supervision provided by two community befriending schemes. The main outcomes were feasibility of recruitment (minimum target n = 35), retention rate of participants, adherence (minimum 10 meetings), acceptability of the intervention, changes in depressive symptoms (assessed at baseline and 6 months) and feasibility of collecting data for a health economic analysis. RESULTS: Recruitment was challenging, and only 16 participants with ID and 10 volunteers were recruited. Six participants were matched with a volunteer and no participants dropped out (except for two volunteers). Four participants completed 10 meetings (mean 11.8). Befriending was thought to be acceptable, but modifications were suggested. An exploratory analysis suggested that GDS-LD score was lower in the intervention group compared with the control group after adjusting for baseline scores, but not significant (adjusted mean difference: -4.0; 95% confidence interval: -11.2 to 3.2). CONCLUSIONS: A large trial would not be feasible based on the recruitment strategies employed in this study. A further feasibility study addressing these challenges or the use of other study designs should be considered.

Resource use and cost of annual health checks in primary care for people with intellectual disabilities.

BACKGROUND: The annual health check (AHC) programme, as part of a Directed Enhanced Service, offers an incentive to general practitioners in England to conduct health checks for people with intellectual disabilities (IDs). The aim of this analysis was to estimate the impact on health care costs of AHCs in primary care to the National Health Service in England by comparing adults with ID who did or did not have AHCs using data obtained from The Health Improvement Network. METHODS: Two hundred eight records of people with ID from The Health Improvement Network database were analysed. Baseline health care resource use was captured at the time the first AHC was recorded (i.e. index date), or the earliest date after 1 April 2008 for those without an AHC. We examined the volume of resource use and associated costs that occurred at the time AHCs were performed, as well as before and after the index date. We then estimated the impact of AHCs on health care costs. RESULTS: The average cost of AHC was estimated at £142.57 (95%CI £135.41 to £149.74). Primary, community and secondary health care costs increased significantly after the index date in the no AHC group owing to higher increase in resource utilisation. Regression analysis showed that the expected health care cost for those who have an AHC is 56% higher than for those who did not have an AHC. Age and gender were also associated with increase in expected health care cost. CONCLUSION: The level of resource utilisation increased in both (AHC and no AHC) groups after the index date. Although the level of resource use before index date was lower in the no AHC group, it increased after the index date up to almost reaching the level of resource utilisation in the AHC group. Further research is needed to explore if the AHCs are effective in reducing health inequalities.

Cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery in adolescents with severe obesity in the UK.

Evidence shows that surgery for severe obesity in adults improves health and psychological functioning, and is cost-effective. Data on bariatric surgery for adolescents with severe obesity are extremely limited, with no evidence on cost-effectiveness. We evaluated the lifetime cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery compared with no surgery in adolescents with severe obesity from the UK's National Health Service perspective. Eighteen adolescents with body mass index ≥40 kg m-2 who underwent bariatric surgery (laparoscopic Roux en Y Gastric Bypass [RYGB] [N = 9], and laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy [SG] [N = 9]) at University College London Hospitals between January 2008 and December 2013 were included. We used a Markov cohort model to compare the lifetime expected costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) between bariatric surgery and no surgery. Mean cost of RYGB and SG procedures were £7100 and £7312, respectively. For RYGB vs. no surgery, the incremental cost/QALY was £2018 (95% CI £1942 - £2042) for males and £2005 (95% CI £1974 - £2031) for females. For SG vs. no surgery, the incremental cost/QALY was £1978 (95% CI £1954 - £2002) for males and £1941 (95% CI £1915 - £1969) for females. Bariatric surgery in adolescents with severe obesity is cost-effective; it is more costly than no surgery however it markedly improved quality of life.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of absorbent dressings in the treatment of highly exuding VLUs.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of using a sodium carboxymethylcellulose dressing (CMC [Aquacel]) and four super absorbent dressings (DryMax Extra[DM], Flivasorb [F], Kerramax [K] and sachet S [S]) in the treatment of highly exuding chronic venous leg ulcers (VLUs) in the UK, from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS). METHOD: A decision model was constructed depicting the patient pathways and associated management of a cohort of 439 patients with highly exuding chronic VLUs of;;: 3 months of age. The model was based on the case records of a cohort of matched patients from The Health Improvement Network (THIN)database (a nationally representative database of patients registered with general practitioners (GPs) in the UK) who were treated with one of the five dressings. The model estimated the costs and outcomes of patient management over 6 months and the relative cost-effectiveness of using each dressing. RESULTS: Patients' mean age was 73.1 years, and 46% were female. Between 39% and 56% ofVLUs healed by 6 months. CMC-treated wounds that remained unhealed increased in size by 43% over the study period, whereas unhealed wounds treated with the other dressings decreased in size by a mean 34%. Consequently, CMC was excluded from the cost-effectiveness analysis. The 6-monthly NHS cost of managing a VLU with S was £3700 per patient, which was 15-28% lower than the cost of managing patients with the other three super absorbents. Additionally, use of S improved patients' health status to a greater extent than the other three super absorbents, since S-treated patients accrued 0.3-3% more QALYs. Starting treatment with S was the preferred strategy followed by DM, K and Fin that order. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the data set,S affords the NHS a cost-effective treatment for managing highly exuding chronic VLUs of ≥3 months of age, compared with DM, F, K and CMC.

An economic comparison of hospital-based and community-based glaucoma clinics.

INTRODUCTION: We have established one model for community care of glaucoma clinic patients. Community optometrists received training and accreditation in glaucoma care. Once qualified they alternated between running half day glaucoma clinics in their own High Street practices and assisting in a hospital-based glaucoma clinic session. This paper reports the cost of this model. METHODS: Micro-costing was undertaken for the hospital clinic. A consensus meeting was held to agree costs for community clinics involving all optometrists in the project along with representatives of the multiple chain optometry practices who had participated. Costs to patients both indirect and direct were calculated following structured interviews of 197 patients attending hospital clinics and 194 attending community clinics. RESULTS: The estimated cost per patient attendance to the hospital clinic was £63.91 and the estimated cost per attendance to the community clinic was £145.62. For patients the combined direct and indirect cost to attend the hospital clinic was £6.15 and the cost to attend the community clinic £5.91. DISCUSSION: The principal reason for the higher cost in the community clinic was higher overhead costs in the community. Re-referral to the hospital system only occurred for 9% of patients and was not a large contribution to the increased cost. Time requested to next appointment was similar for the two clinics. Sensitivity analysis shows a strong effect of increasing patients seen per clinic. It would, however, require 25 patients to be seen per clinician per day in the community in order to make the costs comparable.

Hospital-based glaucoma clinics: what are the costs to patients?

AIM: To investigate the costs to patients attending hospital-based glaucoma clinics. METHODS: A patient-based costs questionnaire was developed and completed for patients attending six ophthalmology units across London (Ealing General Hospital, St Georges Hospital, Mile End Hospital, Upney Centre Barking, St Ann's Hospital and the Royal London Hospital). The questionnaire considered age, sex, ethnicity as well as patient-based costs, opportunity costs, and companion costs. All patients visiting for review or appointments were approached non-selectively. A total of 100 patients were sampled from each unit. RESULTS: The mean age of the full sample was 69.6 years (SD 12.6), with little variation between sites (68.5-71.8 years). There was an almost equal sex distribution (male (298 (50.6%)). There was no major difference in occupational distribution between sites. The majority of people came to hospital by bus (40%) or car (26%). Female patients went slightly more by cab or car, whereas male patients went slightly more by foot or train. There was some variability in transport method by site. The data showed that the Royal London hospital had the highest mean cost per visit (pound16.20), whereas St Georges had the lowest (pound12.90). Upney had the second highest mean cost per visit (pound15.20), whereas Ealing and St Ann's had similar mean costs of (pound13.25) and (pound13), respectively. Travel costs accounted for about one-fifth of the total patient's costs. For all glaucoma clinics, total societal costs were higher than the sum of patients' costs because of the high frequency of companions. A surprising finding was that two-thirds of the population (392 or 66.6%) reported no qualification-considerably higher than the national census statistics for the same population. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this paper presents direct and indirect patient costs in attending hospital glaucoma units for the first time. It highlights the significance of opportunity costs when considering health-care interventions as they amount to a third or more of the total costs of patient attendances to clinics.