Health-related quality of life and willingness to pay measurement among patients on warfarin in Thailand.

BACKGROUND: Complex dosage regimens and the high incidence of adverse events associated with warfarin therapy can affect the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and willingness to pay (WTP) among patients on warfarin. No such previous study has been conducted to assess the HRQoL and WTP among Thai patients on warfarin; therefore, this study aimed to measure these parameters and identify some sociodemographic factors associated with those aspects among patients on warfarin in Thailand. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey study involving 260 patients on warfarin between June 2022 and June 2023 used a quantitative method for data collection. Face-to-face interviews with well-trained interviewers were conducted and patients were required to complete the questionnaires of both World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF (WHOQOL-BREF) and EQ-5D-5L to assess and measure their HRQoL levels. WTP was assessed using a bidding game technique. Descriptive statistics with mean and standard deviations were used to report HRQoL scores and WTP, whereas a generalized linear model was employed to identify factors associated with both HRQoL and WTP. RESULTS: The mean EQ-5D index and mean EQ-VAS score were 0.89 ± 0.15 and 76.92 ± 15.95, respectively, whereas the mean WHOQOL-BREF domain scores were 59.18 ± 14.13, 68.56 ± 15.47, 59.13 ± 19.64, and 65.23 ± 14.04 for the physical, psychological, social, and environmental domains, respectively. Elderly participants (age > 60 years) and those with comorbidities had lower HRQoL scores than their counterparts. The mean WTP was 22.25 ± 32.19 USD for one patient's visit. The presence of comorbidities was the only factor significantly associated with WTP values. CONCLUSIONS: Thai patients on warfarin have lower mean EQ-5D indexes and EQ-VAS scores than members of the general Thai population. Patients on warfarin with comorbidities have diminished HRQoL and WTP values. Therefore, all healthcare professionals should pay more attention to this group of patients on warfarin to achieve better outcomes.

Randomized controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis: Comparing chlorhexidine scrub, ZnO-nanoparticle socks, and their combination in pitted keratolysis treatment.

A cost-effective treatment for pitted keratolysis (PK) is the use of 4% chlorhexidine scrub. Zinc oxide nanoparticle (ZnO-NP)-coated socks have also shown efficacy in PK prevention. In this study, we aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness and safety of combined 4% chlorhexidine scrub and ZnO-NP-coated sock treatment compared to monotherapy. This randomized, controlled trial included 60 male security guards and hospital porters aged ≥18 with PK. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups: 4% chlorhexidine scrub, ZnO-NP-coated socks, or combination therapy. Treatment outcomes were evaluated after 4 weeks. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated using cost-utility analysis. The greatest reduction in visual analog scale scores for foot odor was observed in the combination therapy group, but it was nonsignificant (P = 0.186). Clinical improvement was observed across all groups. The cost-utility analysis revealed that chlorhexidine scrub and regular socks were the least expensive options. The placebo and ZnO-NP-coated sock group had an ICER of US $31 082/quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gain, while the combination therapy gained US $45 105/QALYs compared to the chlorhexidine scrub and regular sock group. Based on our findings, for the treatment of PK, 4% chlorhexidine scrub remains the most cost-effective choice.

Cost-utility study of home-based cryotherapy device for wart treatment: a randomized, controlled, and investigator-blinded trial.

BACKGROUND: Cryotherapy is typically performed by physicians. No cost-utility studies of home-based cryotherapy have been reported. OBJECTIVES: To study the cost utility of home-based cryotherapy devices and in-hospital liquid nitrogen therapy for cutaneous warts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized, controlled, investigator-blinded trial was carried out on patients with cutaneous warts. Participants were randomly assigned to two groups: home-based cryotherapy and in-hospital liquid nitrogen therapy. Clinical examinations were conducted at baseline and monthly until cure, and outcomes (cure rate, side effects, total costs, and quality of life) were compared. A cost-utility analysis was performed. RESULTS: Nineteen of 22 patients completed the treatment and were analyzed. The efficacy of home-based cryotherapy and in-hospital therapy was 72.8% and 64.3%, respectively. Side effects (pain, redness, and burning) were observed. The mean numbers of medical visits were 2.83 for home-based therapy and 3.30 for in-hospital therapy. The total costs for home-based therapy and the in-hospital therapy were US $76.03 and $100.45, respectively. The home-based therapy had 0.2297 quality-adjusted life years, slightly higher than the corresponding value of 0.2254 for in-hospital therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Home-based cryotherapy devices are a cost-saving strategy with similar efficacy to in-hospital liquid nitrogen therapy.

Home-based chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer patients in Thailand: Cost-utility and budget impact analyses.

Home-based chemotherapy (HC) is a new treatment alternative to hospital-based chemotherapy treatment (IP) and is administered via portable intravenous pumps at the patient's home. HC reduces the demand for inpatient bed capacity in hospitals and reduces the cost of an infusion. This study takes a societal perspective while conducting the cost-utility and budget impact analyses (BIA) of HC and IP with an mFOLFOX6 regimen on patients with stage III colon cancer. We conducted a cost-utility analysis with a 6-month time horizon. The parameter inputs for the model were gathered from a retrospective cohort study on patients diagnosed with stage III colon cancer at Ramathibodi Hospital, Bangkok. The resource usage of HC and IP was determined based on medical records. The per-unit direct medical, home health service, and adverse events (AE) management costs were gathered from the standard cost list. The health outcome of treatment was measured in terms of quality-adjusted life years. Disutility related to AE was calculated. We conducted a sensitivity analysis for the uncertainty results and performed BIA based on the societal perspective on a 1-year time horizon. HC provided a cost-saving of $1,513.37 per patient for the period of treatment. Thus, assuming 526 patients per year, the use of HC could achieve a cumulative annual cost-saving of $828,436. HC is a cost-saving strategy compared to IP for stage III colon cancer treatment. We recommend that the service reimbursement should include national standardization in chemotherapy regimens as well as practice guidelines and protocols to prevent serious AEs.

Cost-effectiveness analysis and safety of erythromycin 4% gel and 4% chlorhexidine scrub for pitted keratolysis treatment.

Background: Studies of Pitted keratolysis (PK) treatment are limited. Objectives: To study cost-effectiveness and to compare the safety of 4% chlorhexidine scrub with 4% erythromycin gel, for PK infections. Materials and methods: This cohort study was conducted on naval rating cadets with a clinical diagnosis of PK at Chumpol Naval Rating School, Thailand in 2016. Participants were randomly treated with either 4% erythromycin gel or 4% chlorhexidine scrub for 4 weeks. The clinical examinations were evaluated at the baseline and at 1 and 2 months after treatment. A decision-tree model was used to evaluate the costs, resource utilization and outcomes as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Results: Of 344 naval rating cadets, 125 (36.3%) were diagnosed with PK. Sixty-four were treated with erythromycin. Approximately 80% of participants had complete resolution Foot odor were significantly improved at 2 months (p < .001) for both groups. No adverse effects were reported. Total cost for 4 weeks' treatment with the erythromycin gel and chlorhexidine scrub was US$77.34, US$51.9, respectively. Chlorhexidine treatment and erythromycin gel had 0.1526 and 0.1425 QALYs, respectively. Conclusions: treatment of PK with either 4% chlorhexidine scrub or 4% erythromycin gel had similar outcomes. However, using chlorhexidine scrub was more cost-effective.