Global Patterns of QALY and DALY Use in Surgical Cost-Utility Analyses: A Systematic Review.
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Surgical interventions are being increasingly recognized as cost-effective global priorities, the utility of which are frequently measured using either quality-adjusted (QALY) or disability-adjusted (DALY) life years. The objectives of this study were to: (1) identify surgical cost-effectiveness studies that utilized a formulation of the QALY or DALY as a summary measure, (2) report on global patterns of QALY and DALY use in surgery and the income characteristics of the countries and/or regions involved, and (3) assess for possible associations between national/regional-income levels and the relative prominence of either measure. STUDY DESIGN:PRISMA-guided systematic review of surgical cost-effectiveness studies indexed in PubMed or EMBASE prior to December 15, 2014, that used the DALY and/or QALY as a summary measure. National locations were used to classify publications based on the 2014 World Bank income stratification scheme into: low-, lower-middle-, upper-middle-, or high-income countries. Differences in QALY/DALY use were considered by income level as well as for differences in geographic location and year using descriptive statistics (two-sided Chi-squared tests, Fischer's exact tests in cell counts <5). RESULTS:A total of 540 publications from 128 countries met inclusion criteria, representing 825 "national studies" (regional publications included data from multiple countries). Data for 69.0% (569/825) were reported using QALYs (2.1% low-, 1.2% lower-middle-, 4.4% upper-middle-, and 92.3% high-income countries), compared to 31.0% (256/825) reported using DALYs (46.9% low-, 31.6% lower-middle-, 16.8% upper-middle-, and 4.7% high-income countries) (p<0.001). Studies from the US and the UK dominated the total number of QALY studies (49.9%) and were themselves almost exclusively QALY-based. DALY use, in contrast, was the most common in Africa and Asia. While prominent published use of QALYs (1990s) in surgical cost-effectiveness studies began approximately 10 years earlier than DALYs (2000s), the use of both measures continues to increase. CONCLUSION:As global prioritization of surgical interventions gains prominence, it will be important to consider the comparative implications of summary measure use. The results of this study demonstrate significant income- and geographic-based differences in the preferential utilization of the QALY and DALY for surgical cost-effectiveness studies. Such regional variation holds important implications for efforts to interpret and utilize global health policy research. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015015991.
Project description:Background: We examined the similarities and differences between studies using two common metrics used in cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs): cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. Methods: We used the Tufts Medical Center CEA Registry, which contains English-language cost-per-QALY gained studies, and the Global Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (GHCEA) Registry, which contains cost-per-DALY averted studies. We examined study characteristics, including intervention type, sponsor, country, and primary disease, and also compared the number of published CEAs to disease burden for major diseases and conditions across geographic regions. Results: We identified 6,438 cost-per-QALY and 543 cost-per-DALY studies published through 2016 and observed rapid growth for both literatures. Cost-per-QALY studies most often examined pharmaceuticals and interventions in high-income countries. Cost-per-DALY studies predominantly focused on infectious disease interventions and interventions in low and lower-middle income countries. We found that while diseases imposing a larger burden tend to receive more attention in the cost-effectiveness analysis literature, the number of publications for some diseases and conditions deviates from this pattern, suggesting "under-studied" conditions (e.g., neonatal disorders) and "over-studied" conditions (e.g., HIV and TB). Conclusions: The CEA literature has grown rapidly, with applications to diverse interventions and diseases. The publication of fewer studies than expected for some diseases given their imposed burden suggests funding opportunities for future cost-effectiveness research.
Project description:After more than 25 years, public health programs have not been able to sufficiently reduce the number of new HIV infections. Over 7,000 people become infected with HIV every day. Lack of convincing evidence of cost-effectiveness (CE) may be one of the reasons why implementation of effective programs is not occurring at sufficient scale. This paper identifies, summarizes and critiques the CE literature related to HIV-prevention interventions in low- and middle-income countries during 2005-2008.Systematic identification of publications was conducted through several methods: electronic databases, internet search of international organizations and major funding/implementing agencies, and journal browsing. Inclusion criteria included: HIV prevention intervention, year for publication (2005-2008), setting (low- and middle-income countries), and CE estimation (empirical or modeling) using outcomes in terms of cost per HIV infection averted and/or cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) or quality-adjusted life year (QALY).We found 21 distinct studies analyzing the CE of HIV-prevention interventions published in the past four years (2005-2008). Seventeen CE studies analyzed biomedical interventions; only a few dealt with behavioral and environmental/structural interventions. Sixteen studies focused on sub-Saharan Africa, and only a handful on Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe. Many HIV-prevention interventions are very cost effective in absolute terms (using costs per DALY averted), and also in country-specific relative terms (in cost per DALY measured as percentage of GDP per capita).There are several types of interventions for which CE studies are still not available or insufficient, including surveillance, abstinence, school-based education, universal precautions, prevention for positives and most structural interventions. The sparse CE evidence available is not easily comparable; thus, not very useful for decision making. More than 25 years into the AIDS epidemic and billions of dollars of spending later, there is still much work to be done both on costs and effectiveness to adequately inform HIV prevention planning.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for young women up to age 26 is highly cost-effective and has been implemented in 65 countries globally. We investigate the cost-effectiveness for HPV vaccination program in older women (age > 26 years), heterosexual men and men who have sex with men (MSM). METHOD:A targeted literature review was conducted on PubMed for publications between January 2000 and January 2017 according to the PRISMA guidelines. We included English-language articles that reported the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of HPV vaccination programs for women over age 26, heterosexual men, and MSM and identified the underlying factors for its cost-effectiveness. RESULTS:We included 36 relevant articles (six, 26 and four in older women, heterosexual men and MSM, respectively) from 17 countries (12 high-income (HICs) and five low- and middle-income (LMICs) countries). Most (4/6) studies in women over age 26 did not show cost-effectiveness ($65,000-192,000/QALY gained). Two showed cost-effectiveness, but only when the vaccine cost was largely subsidised and protection to non-naïve women was also considered. Sixteen of 26 studies in heterosexual men were cost-effective (ICER = $19,600-52,800/QALY gained in HICs; $49-5,860/QALY gained in LMICs). Nonavalent vaccines, a low vaccine price, fewer required doses, and a long vaccine protection period were key drivers for cost-effectiveness. In contrast, all four studies on MSM consistently reported cost-effectiveness (ICER = $15,000-$43,000/QALY gained), particularly in MSM age < 40 years and those who were HIV-positive. Countries' vaccination coverage did not significantly correlate with its per-capita Gross National Income. CONCLUSION:Targeted HPV vaccination for MSM should be next priority in HPV prevention after having established a solid girls vaccination programme. Vaccination for heterosexual men should be considered when 2-dose 4vHPV/9vHPV vaccines become available with a reduced price, whereas targeted vaccination for women over age 26 is unlikely to be cost-effective.
Project description:To help reach the target of tuberculosis (TB) disease elimination by 2050, vaccine development needs to occur now. We estimated the impact and cost-effectiveness of potential TB vaccines in low- and middle-income countries using an age-structured transmission model. New vaccines were assumed to be available in 2024, to prevent active TB in all individuals, to have a 5-y to lifetime duration of protection, to have 40-80% efficacy, and to be targeted at "infants" or "adolescents/adults." Vaccine prices were tiered by income group (US $1.50-$10 per dose), and cost-effectiveness was assessed using incremental cost per disability adjusted life year (DALY) averted compared against gross national income per capita. Our results suggest that over 2024-2050, a vaccine targeted to adolescents/adults could have a greater impact than one targeted at infants. In low-income countries, a vaccine with a 10-y duration and 60% efficacy targeted at adolescents/adults could prevent 17 (95% range: 11-24) million TB cases by 2050 and could be considered cost-effective at $149 (cost saving to $387) per DALY averted. If targeted at infants, 0.89 (0.42-1.58) million TB cases could be prevented at $1,692 ($634-$4,603) per DALY averted. This profile targeted at adolescents/adults could be cost-effective at $4, $9, and $20 per dose in low-, lower-middle-, and upper-middle-income countries, respectively. Increased investments in adult-targeted TB vaccines may be warranted, even if only short duration and low efficacy vaccines are likely to be feasible, and trials among adults should be powered to detect low efficacies.
Project description:?Despite longstanding infant vaccination programs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), pertussis continues to cause deaths in the youngest infants. A maternal monovalent acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine, in development, could prevent many of these deaths. We estimated infant pertussis mortality rates at which maternal vaccination would be a cost-effective use of public health resources in LMICs.?We developed a decision model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of maternal aP immunization plus routine infant vaccination vs routine infant vaccination alone in Bangladesh, Nigeria, and Brazil. For a range of maternal aP vaccine prices, one-way sensitivity analyses identified the infant pertussis mortality rates required to make maternal immunization cost-effective by alternative benchmarks ($100, 0.5 gross domestic product [GDP] per capita, and GDP per capita per disability-adjusted life-year [DALY]). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis provided uncertainty intervals for these mortality rates.?Infant pertussis mortality rates necessary to make maternal aP immunization cost-effective exceed the rates suggested by current evidence except at low vaccine prices and/or cost-effectiveness benchmarks at the high end of those considered in this report. For example, at a vaccine price of $0.50/dose, pertussis mortality would need to be 0.051 per 1000 infants in Bangladesh, and 0.018 per 1000 in Nigeria, to cost 0.5 per capita GDP per DALY. In Brazil, a middle-income country, at a vaccine price of $4/dose, infant pertussis mortality would need to be 0.043 per 1000 to cost 0.5 per capita GDP per DALY.?For commonly used cost-effectiveness benchmarks, maternal aP immunization would be cost-effective in many LMICs only if the vaccine were offered at less than $1-$2/dose.
Project description:To determine the population level costs, effects, and cost effectiveness of selected, individual based interventions to combat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma in the context of low and middle income countries.Sectoral cost effectiveness analysis using a lifetime population model.Two World Health Organization sub-regions of the world: countries in sub-Saharan Africa with very high adult and high child mortality (AfrE); and countries in South East Asia with high adult and high child mortality (SearD).Disease rates and profiles were taken from the WHO Global Burden of Disease study; estimates of intervention effects and resource needs were drawn from clinical trials, observational studies, and treatment guidelines. Unit costs were taken from a WHO price database.Cost per disability adjusted life year (DALY) averted, expressed in international dollars ($Int) for the year 2005.In both regions low dose inhaled corticosteroids for mild persistent asthma was considered the most cost effective intervention, with average cost per DALY averted about $Int2500. The next best value strategies were influenza vaccine for COPD in Sear-D (incremental cost $Int4950 per DALY averted) and low dose inhaled corticosteroids plus long acting ? agonists for moderate persistent asthma in Afr-E (incremental cost $Int9112 per DALY averted).COPD is irreversible and progressive, and current treatment options produce relatively little gains relative to the cost. The treatment options available for asthma, however, generally decrease chronic respiratory disease burden at a relatively low cost.
Project description:Each year almost 3 million newborns die within the first 28 days of life, 2.6 million babies are stillborn, and 287,000 women die from complications of pregnancy and childbirth worldwide. Effective and cost-effective interventions and behaviours for mothers and newborns exist, but their coverage remains inadequate in low- and middle-income countries, where the vast majority of deaths occur. Cost-effective strategies are needed to increase the coverage of life-saving maternal and newborn interventions and behaviours in resource-constrained settings.A systematic review was undertaken on the cost-effectiveness of strategies to improve the demand and supply of maternal and newborn health care in low-income and lower-middle-income countries. Peer-reviewed and grey literature published since 1990 was searched using bibliographic databases, websites of selected organizations, and reference lists of relevant studies and reviews. Publications were eligible for inclusion if they report on a behavioural or health systems strategy that sought to improve the utilization or provision of care during pregnancy, childbirth or the neonatal period; report on its cost-effectiveness; and were set in one or more low-income or lower-middle-income countries. The quality of the publications was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. Incremental cost per life-year saved and per disability-adjusted life-year averted were compared to gross domestic product per capita.Forty-eight publications were identified, which reported on 43 separate studies. Sixteen were judged to be of high quality. Common themes were identified and the strategies were presented in relation to the continuum of care and the level of the health system. There was reasonably strong evidence for the cost-effectiveness of the use of women's groups, home-based newborn care using community health workers and traditional birth attendants, adding services to routine antenatal care, a facility-based quality improvement initiative to enhance compliance with care standards, and the promotion of breastfeeding in maternity hospitals. Other strategies reported cost-effectiveness measures that had limited comparability.Demand and supply-side strategies to improve maternal and newborn health care can be cost-effective, though the evidence is limited by the paucity of high quality studies and the use of disparate cost-effectiveness measures.PROSPERO_ CRD42012003255.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Whether to cover cardiovascular disease costs is an increasingly pressing question for low- and middle-income countries. We sought to identify the impact of expanding national insurance to cover primary prevention, secondary prevention, and tertiary treatment for cardiovascular disease in India. METHODS AND RESULTS:We incorporated data from coverage experiments into a validated microsimulation model of myocardial infarction and stroke in India to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of alternate coverage strategies. Coverage of primary prevention alone saved 3.6 million disability-adjusted life-years (DALY) per annum at an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $469 per DALY averted when compared with the status quo of no coverage. Coverage of primary and secondary preventions was dominated by a strategy of covering primary prevention and tertiary treatment, which prevented 6.6 million DALYs at an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $2241 per DALY averted, when compared with that of primary prevention alone. The combination of all 3 categories yielded the greatest impact at an incremental cost per DALY averted of $5588 when compared with coverage of primary prevention plus tertiary treatment. When compared with the status quo of no coverage, coverage of all 3 categories of prevention/treatment yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1331 per DALY averted. In sensitivity analyses, coverage of primary preventive treatments remained cost-effective even if adherence and access to therapy were low, but tertiary coverage would require avoiding unnecessary procedures to remain cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS:Coverage of all 3 major types of cardiovascular treatment would be expected to have high impact and reasonable cost-effectiveness in India across a broad spectrum of access and adherence levels.
Project description:BACKGROUND: There is an increasing body of published cost-utility analyses of health interventions which we sought to draw together to inform research and policy. METHODS: To achieve consistency in costing base and policy context, study scope was limited to Australian-based cost-effectiveness analyses. Through a comprehensive literature review we identified 245 health care interventions that met our study criteria. RESULTS: The median cost-effectiveness ratio was A$18,100 (approximately US$13,000) per QALY/DALY/LY (quality adjusted life year gained or, disability adjusted life year averted or life year gained). Some modalities tended to perform worse, such as vaccinations and diagnostics (median cost/QALY $58,000 and $68,000 respectively), than others such as allied health, lifestyle, in-patient interventions (median cost/QALY/DALY/LY all at approximately A$9,000 approximately US$6,500). Interventions addressing some diseases such as diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance or alcohol and drug dependence tended to perform well (median cost/QALY/DALY/LY < A$3,700, < US$5,000). Interventions targeting younger persons < 25 years (median cost/QALY/DALY/LY < A$41,200) tended to perform less well than those targeting adults > 25 years (median cost/QALY/DALY/LY < A$16,000). However, there was also substantial variation in the cost effectiveness of individual interventions within and across all categories. CONCLUSION: For any given condition, modality or setting there are likely to be examples of interventions that are cost effective and cost ineffective. It will be important for decision makers to make decisions based on the individual merits of an intervention rather than rely on broad generalisations. Further evaluation is warranted to address gaps in the literature and to ensure that evaluations are performed in areas with greatest potential benefit.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:The aim of this paper was to review and compare HIV vaccine cost-effectiveness analyses and describe the effects of uncertainty in model, methodology, and parameterization. METHODS:We systematically searched MEDLINE (1985 through May 2016), EMBASE, the Tufts CEA Registry, and reference lists of articles following Cochrane guidelines and PRISMA reporting. Eligibility criteria included peer-reviewed manuscripts with economic models estimating cost-effectiveness of preventative HIV vaccines. Two reviewers independently assessed study quality and extracted data on model assumptions, characteristics, input parameters, and outcomes. RESULTS:The search yielded 71 studies, of which 11 met criteria for inclusion. Populations included low-income (n=7), middle-income (n=4), and high-income countries (n=2). Model structure varied including decision tree (n=1), Markov (n=5), compartmental (n=4), and microsimulation (n=1). Most measured outcomes in quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained (n=6) while others used unadjusted (n=3) or disability adjusted life-years (n=2). HIV vaccine cost ranged from $1.54 -$75 USD in low-income countries, $55-$100 in middle-income countries, and $500-$1,000 in the United States. Base case ICERs ranged from dominant (cost-offsetting) to $91,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION:Most models predicted HIV vaccines would be cost-effective. Model assumptions about vaccine price, HIV treatment costs, epidemic context, and willingness to pay influenced results more consistently than assumptions on HIV transmission dynamics.