Mapping the Common Barriers to Optimal COPD Care in High and Middle-Income Countries: Qualitative Perspectives from Clinicians.

Purpose: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) poses a significant global health burden despite being largely preventable and treatable. Despite the availability of guidelines, COPD care remains suboptimal in many settings, including high-income countries (HICs) and upper-middle-income countries (UMICs), with varied approaches to diagnosis and management. This study aimed to identify common and unique barriers to COPD care across six countries (Australia, Spain, Taiwan, Argentina, Mexico, and Russia) to inform global policy initiatives for improved care. Methods: COPD care pathways were mapped for each country and supplemented with epidemiological, health-economic, and clinical data from a targeted literature review. Semi-structured interviews with 17 respiratory care clinicians were used to further validate the pathways and identify key barriers. Thematic content analysis was used to generate the themes. Results: Six themes were common in most HICs and UMICs: "Challenges in COPD diagnosis", "Strengthening the role of primary care", "Fragmented healthcare systems and coordination challenges", "Inadequate management of COPD exacerbations", "Limited access to specialized care" and, "Impact of underfinanced and overloaded healthcare systems". One theme, "Insurance coverage and reimbursement challenges", was more relevant for UMICs. HICs and UMICs differ in patient and healthcare provider awareness, primary care involvement, spirometry access, and availability of specialized care. Both face issues with healthcare fragmentation, guideline adherence, and COPD exacerbation management. In addition, UMICs also grapple with resource limitations and healthcare infrastructure challenges. Conclusion: Many challenges to COPD care are the same in both HICs and UMICs, underscoring the pervasive nature of these issues. While country-specific issues require customized solutions, there are untapped possibilities for implementing global respiratory strategies that support countries to manage COPD effectively. In addition to healthcare system-level initiatives, there is a crucial need for political prioritization of COPD to allocate the essential resources it requires.

Comparing the Costs and Diagnostic Outcomes of Replacing Cytology with the QIAsure DNA Methylation Test as a Triage within HPV Primary Cervical Cancer Screening in The Netherlands.

Detecting hypermethylation of tumour suppressor genes could provide an alternative to liquid-based cytology (LBC) triage within HPV primary cervical screening. The impact of using the QIAsure® FAM19A4/mir124-2 DNA Methylation Test (QIAGEN, N.V, Hilden, Germany) on CIN3+ diagnoses, retention, unnecessary colposcopies, and programme costs is unknown. A decision-tree model was developed to compare LBC with the QIAsure Methylation testing to guide colposcopy referral. Incorporating clinician- and self-sampling pathways the model was informed by the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme, published studies, and manufacturer data. Clinical and cost outcomes were assessed using two scenarios for DNA methylation testing and LBC relative performance. Sensitivity analyses (deterministic and probabilistic) were performed to assess model and parameter uncertainty. A range of self-sampling uptake was assessed in scenario analyses. For the screening cohort (n = 807,269) where 22.1% self-sampled, the number of unnecessary colposcopies and CIN3+ diagnoses varied according to the relative performance of methylation testing and LBC. Irrespective of relative performance, the cost per complete screen was lower and fewer people were lost to follow-up when using DNA methylation testing. The results indicate that, within an HPV primary screening programme that incorporates self-sampling, using the QIAsure Methylation Test for triage reduces the cost per screen compared to LBC.

Two self-sampling strategies for HPV primary cervical cancer screening compared with clinician-collected sampling: an economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs and effects of three sampling strategies for human papillomavirus (HPV) primary screening. DESIGN: Cost-consequence analysis from a health system perspective using a deterministic decision tree model. SETTING: England. PARTICIPANTS: A cohort of 10 000 women aged 25-65 years eligible for the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP). METHODS: The model was based on the NHSCSP HPV primary screening pathway and adapted for self-sampling. It used a 3-year cycle: routine screening (year 1) and recall screening (years 2/3). Parameter inputs were informed using published studies, NHSCSP reports and input from experts and manufacturers. Costs were from 2020/2021, British pound sterling (£). INTERVENTIONS: Three sampling strategies were implemented: (1) routine clinician-collected cervical sample, (2) self-collected first-void (FV) urine, (3) self-collected vaginal swab. The hypothetical self-sampling strategies involved mailing women a sampling kit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes: overall costs (for all screening steps to colposcopy), number of complete screens and cost per complete screen. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: number of women screened, number of women lost to follow-up, cost per colposcopy and total screening costs for a plausible range of uptake scenarios. RESULTS: In the base case, the average cost per complete screen was £56.81 for clinician-collected cervical sampling, £38.57 for FV urine self-sampling and £40.37 for vaginal self-sampling. In deterministic sensitivity analysis, the variables most affecting the average cost per screen were the cost of sample collection for clinician-collected sampling and the cost of laboratory HPV testing for the self-sampling strategies. Scaled to consider routine screening in England, if uptake in non-attenders increased by 15% and 50% of current screeners converted to self-sampling, the NHSCSP would save £19.2 million (FV urine) or £16.5 million (vaginal) per year. CONCLUSION: Self-sampling could provide a less costly alternative to clinician-collected sampling for routine HPV primary screening and offers opportunities to expand the reach of cervical screening to under-screened women.