Wound-only injection of rabies immunoglobulin (RIG) saves lives and costs less than a dollar per patient by "pooling strategy".

Since 2008, we in Himachal Pradesh have used a "pooling strategy" to help patients save money by pooling vials of antirabies vaccine at a centralized hospital and sharing them using the intradermal technique. In 2014, there was an acute shortage of rabies immunoglobulins (RIG) and two patients died after four injections of rabies vaccine were administered without RIG, which was not commercially available. After an extensive literature review and technical and ethical committee clearances, in June 2014 we started to infiltrate equine RIG (eRIG) into wound/s only without the recommended systemic intramuscular (IM) injection. WHO recommended this technique in 2018. During the four-year period June 2014 to June 2018, 7506 of 10,830 patients exposed to suspected rabid animals were injected with eRIG in and around the wounds in a single clinic at DDU Hospital Shimla without any adverse outcomes. The average volume of eRIG used per patient was 0.75 mL and cost US$ 0.75. Of the 80% of patients who were followed up, all were healthy at the end of a year, including 26 patients bitten by laboratory-confirmed rabid dogs. The reaction rate after PEP administration also declined significantly. Since February 2018, Himachal has started following the new WHO recommendations on PEP regimens of three intradermal antirabies vaccines instead of four, thereby saving hundreds of vaccine vials that became useful during shortages of rabies vaccine in India. To date, more than 700 vaccine vials have been saved in a single clinic at DDU hospital during the past 6 months alone. Not giving PEP to patients who have consumed raw milk from a suspected rabid cow has also saved 62 vials. Currently, 90 "pooling centers" have been established for sharing of vaccine and eRIG vials in Himachal State, generating huge savings that have enabled the government to provide PEP free of charge to all. The new WHO guidelines are a positive step towards a rabies-free world by 2030.

An economic model assessing the value of microneedle patch delivery of the seasonal influenza vaccine.

BACKGROUND: New vaccine technologies may improve the acceptability, delivery (potentially enabling self-administration), and product efficacy of influenza vaccines. One such technology is the microneedle patch (MNP), a skin delivery technology currently in development. Although MNPs hold promise in preclinical studies, their potential economic and epidemiologic impacts have not yet been evaluated. METHODS: We utilized a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered (SEIR) transmission model linked to an economic influenza outcomes model to assess the economic value of introducing the MNP into the current influenza vaccine market in the United States from the third-party payer and societal perspectives. We also explored the impact of different vaccination settings, self-administration, the MNP price, vaccine efficacy, compliance, and MNP market share. Outcomes included costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), cases, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; cost/QALY). RESULTS: With healthcare provider administration, MNP introduction would be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$23,347/QALY) at all MNP price points ($9.50-$30) and market shares (10-60%) assessed, except when compliance and efficacy were assumed to be the same as existing vaccines and the MNP occupied a 10% market share. If MNP self-administration were available (assuming the same efficacy as current technologies), MNP compliance or its efficacy would need to increase by ≥3% in order to be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$1401/QALY), assuming a 2% reduction in administration success with unsupervised self-administration. Under these conditions, MNP introduction would be cost-effective for all price points and market shares assessed. CONCLUSIONS: When healthcare providers administered the MNP, its introduction would be cost-effective or dominant (i.e., less costly and more effective) in the majority of scenarios assessed. If self-administration were available, MNP introduction would be cost-effective if it increased compliance enough to overcome any decrease in self-administration success or if the MNP presentation afforded an increase in efficacy over current delivery methods for influenza vaccines.

A randomized double-blind study comparing intradermal anesthetic tolerability, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of lidocaine, buffered lidocaine, and bacteriostatic normal saline for peripheral intravenous insertion.

In this double-blind study, 256 surgical patients meeting eligibility criteria were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to 1 of the 3 intradermal injection groups prior to intravenous (IV) line insertion (Group 1=1% lidocaine, Group 2=1% buffered lidocaine, and Group 3=bacteriostatic normal saline with a benzyl alcohol preservative). The most tolerable solution, as measured by the average level of pain from an intradermal insertion, was buffered lidocaine (Group 2). The most efficacious, as measured by average level of pain at IV cannulation, were Groups 1 and 2. Group 3 was the most cost-effective.

Economic analysis of "liquid" versus surgical face-lift: are large-volume facial soft tissue filler injection treatments a viable alternative to rhytidectomy?

For many years, rhytidectomy has been the mainstay of facial rejuvenative treatment, and continued improvement of our understanding of the anatomy, aesthetics, and aging of the face has allowed the development of safer, longer lasting, and more natural surgical techniques. However, the renaissance of soft tissue augmentation that began at the start of the new millennium now offers office-based rejuvenative procedures that have been touted as equivalent to traditional surgical procedures, including the "injectable rhinoplasty" and, more commonly, the "injectable face-lift." Although injectable filler treatments cannot exactly simulate the benefits of surgical rhytidectomy, they can significantly rejuvenate the face and obviate or delay the need for surgery. These are touted as simpler as well as easier and cheaper for the patient. But are they? No cost-effectiveness study of these "filler face-lifts" has ever been published, and the need for repeat treatments suggests that at some point in time, patient costs for these procedures may exceed those for a single surgical procedure. This study examines common scenarios for large-volume soft tissue filler facial rejuvenation and compares the costs of these treatments with those of traditional face-lift surgery.

FILLERS-Q: an instrument for assessing patient experiences after treatment with facial injectable soft tissue fillers.

Patient-reported outcomes data are limited after injectable soft tissue filler treatment. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are becoming integral to medical practices in other specialties and will become so as well in facial plastic surgery. The obvious differences in types of disorders treated and the outcomes of primary importance seen between general medical/surgical and facial plastic surgery practices make institution of standard outcomes studies difficult in facial plastic surgery. However, understanding the patient's experience and satisfaction with treatment is essential to continue to provide excellent care to facial aesthetic patients. This article describes use of a new survey instrument, Facial Injectables: Longevity, Late and Early Reactions and Satisfaction Questionnaire (FILLERS-Q), in assessing patient response to facial injections of soft tissue fillers. FILLERS-Q is a 43-item questionnaire that captures patient demographics (4 items), patient satisfaction with treatment (10 items), procedure-related events (3 to 7 items), impact on relationships (9 to 15 items), and economic considerations related to dermal filler treatment (3 to 7 items). The results provide a "snapshot" of patients treated in an individual surgeon's practice.

Pattern and burden of animal bite cases in a tertiary care hospital in Haryana.

Rabies is an endemic disease in both developed and developing world and is responsible for a large number of morbidities and mortalities in humans. Limited supply of vaccine hampers the accessibility of life saving treatment. In our study carried out in a tertiary care hospital in Haryana showed that there were 3617 animal bite cases reported in a year with an average of 9.91 new cases per day. The average economic burden related to management of these bite cases is 3.5 lacs per month. This cost along with vaccine demand can be substantially reduced if intradermal schedule is introduced.

Low dose intradermal vaccination is superior to high dose intramuscular vaccination for hepatitis B in unresponsive hemodialysis patients.

After two intramuscular (IM) vaccination protocols (40 microg at 0, 1, 2, and 6 months), patients who were unresponsive to hepatitis B vaccination were collected from three HD centers. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of intradermal (ID) and repeated IM vaccination protocols. Thirty-three of 639 HD patients were found to be unresponsive. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups: one to receive 80 microg ID and the other 160 microg IM vaccination protocol. Both ID (p = 0.000) and IM (p = 0.03) groups disclosed statistically significant seroconversion rates six months after the last vaccination dose. The seroconversion rate was 94.1% in the ID and 50% in the IM groups - showing a significant improvement in the ID group (p = 0.011). A low-dose ID is superior to standard IM vaccination protocol and also more cost-effective in unresponsive HD patients.

Cost effectiveness of interventions for lateral epicondylitis: results from a randomised controlled trial in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: Lateral epicondylitis is a common complaint, with an annual incidence between 1% and 3% in the general population. The Dutch College of General Practitioners in The Netherlands has issued guidelines that recommend a wait-and-see policy. However, these guidelines are not evidence based. DESIGN AND SETTING: This paper presents the results of an economic evaluation in conjunction with a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effects of three interventions in primary care for patients with lateral epicondylitis. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Patients with pain at the lateral side of the elbow were randomised to one of three interventions: a wait-and-see policy, corticosteroid injections or physiotherapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: Clinical outcomes included general improvement, pain during the day, elbow disability and QOL. The economic evaluation was conducted from a societal perspective. Direct and indirect costs (in 1999 values) were measured by means of cost diaries over a period of 12 months. Differences in mean costs between groups were evaluated by applying non-parametric bootstrap techniques. The mean total costs per patient for corticosteroid injections were euro430, compared with euro631 for the wait-and-see policy and euro921 for physiotherapy. After 12 months, the success rate in the physiotherapy group (91%) was significantly higher than in the injection group (69%), but only slightly higher than in the wait-and-see group (83%). The differences in costs and effects showed no dominance for any of the three groups. The incremental cost-utility ratios were (approximately): euro7000 per utility gain for the wait-and-see policy versus corticosteroid injections; euro12000 per utility gain for physiotherapy versus corticosteroid injections, and euro34500 for physiotherapy versus the wait-and-see policy. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this economic evaluation provided no reason to update or amend the Dutch guidelines for GPs, which recommend a wait-and-see policy for patients with lateral epicondylitis.