Cost-effectiveness of molecular point-of-care testing for influenza viruses in elderly patients at ambulatory care setting.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Early initiation of antiviral therapy in elderly patients with influenza is associated with reduced risk of extra clinic visit, hospitalization and death. This study examined the cost-effectiveness of molecular POCT for detection of influenza viruses in Hong Kong elderly patients with influenza-like illness (ILI) in the outpatient clinics.A decision analytic model was used to simulate outcomes of a hypothetical cohort of elderly patients presented with ILI at outpatient clinics during peak season of influenza with two diagnostic approaches: Rapid molecular assay (POCT-PCR group) and clinical judgement with no POCT. Outcome measures included influenza-associated direct medical cost, hospitalization and mortality rates, quality-adjusted life year loss (QALY loss), and incremental cost per QALY saved (ICER).In base-case analysis, POCT-PCR group was expected to reduce hospitalization (1.38% versus 2.85%) and mortality rate (0.08% versus 0.16%) and save 0.00112 QALYs at higher cost (by USD33.2 per ILI patient), comparing with clinical judgement group. The ICER of POCT-PCR was 29,582 USD/QALY saved. One-way sensitivity analyses found ICER sensitive to: Hospitalization rate without prompt antiviral therapy; odds ratio of hospitalization with prompt therapy; influenza prevalence; patient age and mortality rate of hospitalized patients. POCT-PCR was cost-effective in 60.6% and 99.4% of 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations at willingness-to-pay threshold of 1x and 3x gross domestic product per capita of Hong Kong, respectively.Molecular POCT for influenza detection in elderly patients with ILI at outpatient clinics during peak influenza season appeared to be cost-effective in Hong Kong.
Project description:BackgroundWhile point of care testing (PoCT) for general practitioners is becoming increasingly popular, few studies have investigated whether it represents value for money. This study aims to assess the relative cost-effectiveness of PoCT in general practice (GP) compared to usual testing practice through a pathology laboratory.MethodsA cost-effectiveness analysis based on a randomized controlled trial with 4,968 patients followed up for 18 months and fifty-three general practices in urban, rural and remote locations across three states in Australia.The incremental costs and health outcomes associated with a clinical strategy of PoCT for INR, HbA1c, lipids, and ACR were compared to those from pathology laboratory testing. Costs were expressed in year 2006 Australian dollars. Non-parametric bootstrapping was used to generate 95% confidence intervals.ResultsThe point estimate of the total direct costs per patient to the health care sector for PoCT was less for ACR than for pathology laboratory testing, but greater for INR, HbA1c and Lipids, although none of these differences was statistically significant. PoCT led to significant cost savings to patients and their families. When uncertainty around the point estimates was taken into account, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for PoCT was found to be unfavourable for INR, but somewhat favourable for ACR, while substantial uncertainty still surrounds PoCT for HbA1c and Lipids.ConclusionsThe decision whether to fund PoCT will depend on the price society is willing to pay for achievement of the non-standard intermediate outcome indicator.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12605000272695.
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine if use of point of care testing (POCT) is less costly than laboratory testing to the National Health Service (NHS) in delivering the NHS Health Check (NHSHC) programme in the primary care setting.DesignObservational study and theoretical mathematical model with microcosting approach.SettingWe collected data on NHSHC delivered at nine general practices (seven using POCT; two not using POCT).ParticipantsWe recruited nine general practices offering NHSHC and a pathology services laboratory in the same area.MethodsWe conducted mathematical modelling with permutations in the following fields: provider type (healthcare assistant or nurse), type of test performed (total cholesterol with either lab fasting glucose or HbA1c), cost of consumables and variable uptake rates, including rate of non-response to invite letter and rate of missed [did not attend (DNA)] appointments. We calculated total expected cost (TEC) per 100 invites, number of NHSHC conducted per 100 invites and costs for completed NHSHC for laboratory and POCT-based pathways. A univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to account for uncertainty in the input parameters.Main outcome measuresWe collected data on cost, volume and type of pathology services performed at seven general practices using POCT and a pathology services laboratory. We collected data on response to the NHSHC invitation letter and DNA rates from two general practices.ResultsTEC of using POCT to deliver a routine NHSHC is lower than the laboratory-led pathway with savings of £29 per 100 invited patients up the point of cardiovascular disease risk score presentation. Use of POCT can deliver NHSHC in one sitting, whereas the laboratory pathway offers patients several opportunities to DNA appointment.ConclusionsTEC of using POCT to deliver an NHSHC in the primary care setting is lower than the laboratory-led pathway. Using POCT minimises DNA rates associated with laboratory testing and enables completion of NHSHC in one sitting.
Project description:Adults older than 50 years are at greater risk for death and severe disability from influenza. Persons in this age group, however, are frequently not vaccinated, despite extensive efforts by physicians to provide this preventive measure in primary care settings. We performed this study to determine if influenza vaccination of older adults in the emergency department (ED) may be cost-effective.Using a probabilistic decision model with quasi-Markov modeling of a typical influenza season, we calculated costs and health outcomes for a hypothetical cohort of patients using parameters from the literature. Three ED-based intervention strategies were compared: (1) no vaccination offered, (2) vaccination offered to patients older than 65 years (limited strategy), and (3) vaccination offered to all patients who are 50 years and older (inclusive strategy). Outcomes were measured as costs, lives saved, and incremental costs per life saved. We performed deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.Vaccination of patients 50 years of age and older results in an incremental cost of $34,610 per life saved when compared with the no-vaccination strategy. Limiting vaccination to only those older than 65 years results in an incremental cost of $13,084 per life saved. Results were sensitive to changes in vaccine cost but were insensitive to changes in other model parameters.Vaccination of older adults against influenza in the ED setting is cost-effective, especially for those older than 65 years. Emergency departments may be an important setting for providing influenza vaccination to adults who may otherwise have remained unvaccinated.
Project description:IntroductionRapid Point of Care Testing (POCT) for influenza could be used to provide information on influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) as well as influencing clinical decision-making in primary care.MethodsWe undertook a test negative case control study to estimate the overall and age-specific (6 months-17 years, 18-64 years, ≥65 years old) IVE against medically attended POCT-confirmed influenza. The study took place over the winter of 2019-2020 and was nested within twelve general practices that are part of the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC), the English sentinel surveillance network.Results648 POCT were conducted. 193 (29.7%) of those who were swabbed had received the seasonal influenza vaccine. The crude unadjusted overall IVE was 46.1% (95% CI: 13.9-66.3). After adjusting for confounders the overall IVE was 26.0% (95% CI: 0-65.5). In total 211 patients were prescribed an antimicrobial after swab testing. Given a positive influenza POCT result, the odds ratio (OR) of receiving an antiviral was 21.1 (95%CI: 2.4-182.2, p = <0.01) and the OR of being prescribed an antibiotic was 0.6 (95%CI: 0.4-0.9, p = <0.01).DiscussionUsing influenza POCT in a primary care sentinel surveillance network to estimate IVE is feasible and provides comparable results to published IVE estimates. A further advantage is that near patient testing of influenza is associated with improvements in appropriate antiviral and antibiotic use. Larger, randomised studies are needed in primary care to see if these trends are still present and to explore their impact on outcomes.
Project description:More appropriate and measured use of antibiotics may be achieved using point-of-care (POC) C-reactive protein (CRP) testing, but there is limited evidence of cost-effectiveness in routine practice. A decision analytic model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of testing, compared with standard care, in adults presenting in primary care with symptoms of acute respiratory tract infection (ARTI). Analyses considered (1) pragmatic use of testing, reflective of routine clinical practice, and (2) testing according to clinical guidelines. Threshold and scenario analysis were performed to identify cost-effective scenarios. In patients with symptoms of ARTI and based on routine practice, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of CRP testing were £19,705 per quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) gained and £16.07 per antibiotic prescription avoided. Following clinical guideline, CRP testing in patients with lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) cost £4390 per QALY gained and £9.31 per antibiotic prescription avoided. At a threshold of £20,000 per QALY, the probabilities of POC CRP testing being cost-effective were 0.49 (ARTI) and 0.84 (LRTI). POC CRP testing as implemented in routine practice is appreciably less cost-effective than when adhering to clinical guidelines. The implications for antibiotic resistance and Clostridium difficile infection warrant further investigation.
Project description:BackgroundThe number of people on antiretroviral therapy (ART) requiring treatment monitoring in low-resource settings is rapidly increasing. Point-of-care (POC) testing for ART monitoring might alleviate burden on centralised laboratories and improve clinical outcomes, but its cost-effectiveness is unknown.MethodsWe used cost and effectiveness data from the STREAM trial in South Africa (February, 2017-October, 2018), which evaluated POC testing for viral load, CD4 count, and creatinine, with task shifting from professional to lower-cadre registered nurses compared with laboratory-based testing without task shifting (standard of care). We parameterised an agent-based network model, EMOD-HIV, to project the impact of implementing this intervention in South Africa over 20 years, simulating approximately 175 000 individuals per run. We assumed POC monitoring increased viral suppression by 9 percentage points, enrolment into community-based ART delivery by 25 percentage points, and switching to second-line ART by 1 percentage point compared with standard of care, as reported in the STREAM trial. We evaluated POC implementation in varying clinic sizes (10-50 patient initiating ART per month). We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and report the mean and 90% model variability of 250 runs, using a cost-effectiveness threshold of US$500 per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted for our main analysis.FindingsPOC testing at 70% coverage of patients on ART was projected to reduce HIV infections by 4·5% (90% model variability 1·6 to 7·6) and HIV-related deaths by 3·9% (2·0 to 6·0). In clinics with 30 ART initiations per month, the intervention had an ICER of $197 (90% model variability -27 to 863) per DALY averted; results remained cost-effective when varying background viral suppression, ART dropout, intervention effectiveness, and reduction in HIV transmissibility. At higher clinic volumes (≥40 ART initiations per month), POC testing was cost-saving and at lower clinic volumes (20 ART initiations per month) the ICER was $734 (93 to 2569). A scenario that assumed POC testing did not increase enrolment into community ART delivery produced ICERs that exceeded the cost-effectiveness threshold for all clinic volumes.InterpretationPOC testing is a promising strategy to cost-effectively improve patient outcomes in moderately sized clinics in South Africa. Results are most sensitive to changes in intervention impact on enrolment into community-based ART delivery.FundingNational Institutes of Health.
Project description:BackgroundUntreated syphilis in pregnancy is associated with adverse clinical outcomes for the infant. Most syphilis infections occur in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), where coverage of antenatal screening for syphilis is inadequate. Recently introduced point-of-care syphilis tests have high accuracy and demonstrate potential to increase coverage of antenatal screening. However, country-specific cost-effectiveness data for these tests are limited. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of antenatal syphilis screening for 43 countries in SSA and estimate the impact of universal screening on stillbirths, neonatal deaths, congenital syphilis, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted.Methods and findingsThe decision analytic model reflected the perspective of the national health care system and was based on the sensitivity (86%) and specificity (99%) reported for the immunochromatographic strip (ICS) test. Clinical outcomes of infants born to syphilis-infected mothers on the end points of stillbirth, neonatal death, and congenital syphilis were obtained from published sources. Treatment was assumed to consist of three injections of benzathine penicillin. Country-specific inputs included the antenatal prevalence of syphilis, annual number of live births, proportion of women with at least one antenatal care visit, per capita gross national income, and estimated hourly nurse wages. In all 43 sub-Saharan African countries analyzed, syphilis screening is highly cost-effective, with an average cost/DALY averted of US$11 (range: US$2-US$48). Screening remains highly cost-effective even if the average prevalence falls from the current rate of 3.1% (range: 0.6%-14.0%) to 0.038% (range: 0.002%-0.113%). Universal antenatal screening of pregnant women in clinics may reduce the annual number of stillbirths by up to 64,000, neonatal deaths by up to 25,000, and annual incidence of congenital syphilis by up to 32,000, and avert up to 2.6 million DALYs at an estimated annual direct medical cost of US$20.8 million.ConclusionsUse of ICS tests for antenatal syphilis screening is highly cost-effective in SSA. Substantial reduction in DALYs can be achieved at a relatively modest budget impact. In SSA, antenatal programs should expand access to syphilis screening using the ICS test. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.
Project description:Rapid diagnostic tools have been shown to improve linkage of patients to care. In the context of infectious diseases, assessing the impact and cost-effectiveness of such tools at the population level, accounting for both direct and indirect effects, is key to informing adoption of these tools. Point-of-care (POC) CD4 testing has been shown to be highly effective in increasing the proportion of HIV positive patients who initiate ART. We assess the impact and cost-effectiveness of introducing POC CD4 testing at the population level in South Africa in a range of care contexts, using a dynamic compartmental model of HIV transmission, calibrated to the South African HIV epidemic. We performed a meta-analysis to quantify the differences between POC and laboratory CD4 testing on the proportion linking to care following CD4 testing. Cumulative infections averted and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated over one and three years. We estimated that POC CD4 testing introduced in the current South African care context can prevent 1.7% (95% CI: 0.4% - 4.3%) of new HIV infections over 1 year. In that context, POC CD4 testing was cost-effective 99.8% of the time after 1 year with a median estimated ICER of US$4,468/DALY averted. In healthcare contexts with expanded HIV testing and improved retention in care, POC CD4 testing only became cost-effective after 3 years. The results were similar when, in addition, ART was offered irrespective of CD4 count, and CD4 testing was used for clinical assessment. Our findings suggest that even if ART is expanded to all HIV positive individuals and HIV testing efforts are increased in the near future, POC CD4 testing is a cost-effective tool, even within a short time horizon. Our study also illustrates the importance of evaluating the potential impact of such diagnostic technologies at the population level, so that indirect benefits and costs can be incorporated into estimations of cost-effectiveness.
Project description:BackgroundPoint of care testing (PoCT) may be a useful adjunct in the management of chronic conditions in general practice (GP). The provision of pathology test results at the time of the consultation could lead to enhanced clinical management, better health outcomes, greater convenience and satisfaction for patients and general practitioners (GPs), and savings in costs and time. It could also result in inappropriate testing, increased consultations and poor health outcomes resulting from inaccurate results. Currently there are very few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in GP that have investigated these aspects of PoCT.Design/methodsThe Point of Care Testing in General Practice Trial (PoCT Trial) was an Australian Government funded multi-centre, cluster randomised controlled trial to determine the safety, clinical effectiveness, cost effectiveness and satisfaction of PoCT in a GP setting.The PoCT Trial covered an 18 month period with the intervention consisting of the use of PoCT for seven tests used in the management of patients with diabetes, hyperlipidaemia and patients on anticoagulant therapy. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients within target range, a measure of therapeutic control. In addition, the PoCT Trial investigated the safety of PoCT, impact of PoCT on patient compliance to medication, stakeholder satisfaction, cost effectiveness of PoCT versus laboratory testing, and influence of geographic location.DiscussionThe paper provides an overview of the Trial Design, the rationale for the research methodology chosen and how the Trial was implemented in a GP environment. The evaluation protocol and data collection processes took into account the large number of patients, the broad range of practice types distributed over a large geographic area, and the inclusion of pathology test results from multiple pathology laboratories.The evaluation protocol developed reflects the complexity of the Trial setting, the Trial Design and the approach taken within the funding provided. The PoCT Trial is regarded as a pragmatic RCT, evaluating the effectiveness of implementing PoCT in GP and every effort was made to ensure that, in these circumstances, internal and external validity was maintained.Trial registration12612605000272695.