Cost-effectiveness of breast cancer control strategies in Central America: The cases of Costa Rica and Mexico

__Abstract__ This paper reports the most cost-effective policy options to support and improve breast cancer control in Costa Rica and Mexico. Total costs and effects of breast cancer interventions were estimated using the health care perspective and WHO-CHOICE methodology. Effects were measured in disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted. Costs were assessed in 2009 United States Dollars (US$). To the extent available, analyses were based on locally obtained data. In Costa Rica, the current strategy of treating breast cancer in stages I to IV at a 80$4,739 per DALY averted. At a coverage level of 95%, biennial clinical breast examination (CBE) screening could improve Costa Rica's population health twofold, and can still be considered very cost-effective (ICER US$5,964/DALY). For Mexico, our results indicate that at 95$5,021/DALY). If more resources are available in Mexico, biennial mammography screening for women 50-70 yrs (ICER US$12,718/DALY), adding trastuzumab (ICER US$13,994/DALY) or screening women 40-70 yrs biennially plus trastuzumab (ICER US$17,115/DALY) are less cost-effective options. We recommend both Costa Rica and Mexico to engage in MAR, CBE or mammography screening programs, depending on their budget. The results of this study should be interpreted with caution however, as the evidence on the intervention effectiveness is uncertain. Also, these programs require several organizational, budgetary and human resources, and the accessibility of breast cancer diagnostic, referral, treatment and palliative care facilities should be improved simultaneously. A gradual implementation of early detection programs should give the respective Ministries of Health the time to negotiate the required budget, train the required human resources and understand possible socioeconomic barriers

A randomized controlled trial of nonoperative treatment versus open reduction and internal fixation for stable, displaced, partial articular fractures of the radial head: The RAMBO trial

Background: The choice between operative or nonoperative treatment is questioned for partial articular fractures of the radial head that have at least 2 millimeters of articular step-off on at least one radiograph (defined as displaced), but less than 2 millimeter of gap between the fragments (defined as stable) and that are not associated with an elbow dislocation, interosseous ligament injury, or other fractures. These kinds of fractures are often classified as Mason type-2 fractures. Retrospective comparative studies suggest that operative treatment might be better than nonoperative treatment, but the long-term results of nonoperative treatment are very good. Most experts agree that problems like reduced range of motion, painful crepitation, nonunion or bony ankylosis are infrequent with both nonoperative and operative treatment of an isolated displaced partial articular fracture of the radial head, but determining which patients will have problems is difficult. A prospective, randomized comparison would help minimize bias and determine the balance between operative and nonoperative risks and benefits. Methods/Design. The RAMBO trial (Radial Head - Amsterdam - Amphia - Boston - Others) is an international prospective, randomized, multicenter trial. The primary objective of this study is to compare patient related outcome defined by the 'Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score' twelve months after injury between operative and nonoperative treated patients. Adult patients with partial articular fractures of the radial head that comprise at least 1/3rd of the articular surface, have ≥ 2 millimeters of articular step-off but less than 2 millimeter of gap between the fragments will be enrolled. Secondary outcome measures will be the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI), the Oxford Elbow Score (OES), pain intensity through the 'Numeric Rating Scale', range of motion (flexion arc and rotational arc), radiographic appearance of the fracture (heterotopic ossification, radiocapitellar and ulnohumeral arthrosis, fracture healing, and signs of implant loosening or breakage) and adverse events (infection, nerve injury, secondary interventions) after one year. Discussion. The successful completion of this trial will provide evidence on the best treatment for stable, displaced, partial articular fractures of the radial head. Trial registration. The trial is registered at the Dutch Trial Register: NTR3413

Modelling the extinction of Steller's sea cow

Steller's sea cow, a giant sirenian discovered in 1741 and extinct by 1768, is one of the few megafaunal mammal species to have died out during the historical period. The species is traditionally considered to have been exterminated by ‘blitzkrieg’-style direct overharvesting for food, but it has also been proposed that its extinction resulted from a sea urchin population explosion triggered by extirpation of local sea otter populations that eliminated the shallow-water kelps on which sea cows fed. Hunting records from eighteenth century Russian expeditions to the Commander Islands, in conjunction with life-history data extrapolated from dugongs, permit modelling of sea cow extinction dynamics. Sea cows were massively and wastefully overexploited, being hunted at over seven times the sustainable limit, and suggesting that the initial Bering Island sea cow population must have been higher than suggested by previous researchers to allow the species to survive even until 1768. Environmental changes caused by sea otter declines are unlikely to have contributed to this extinction event. This indicates that megafaunal extinctions can be effected by small bands of hunters using pre-industrial technologies, and highlights the catastrophic impact of wastefulness when overexploiting resources mistakenly perceived as ‘infinite’

Costs of relaparotomy on-demand versus planned relaparotomy in patients with severe peritonitis: an economic evaluation within a randomized controlled trial

Introduction: Results of the first randomized trial comparing on-demand versus planned-relaparotomy strategy in patients with severe peritonitis (RELAP trial) indicated no clear differences in primary outcomes. We now report the full economic evaluation for this trial, including detailed methods, nonmedical costs, further differentiated cost calculations, and robustness of different assumptions in sensitivity analyses. Methods: An economic evaluation was conducted from a societal perspective alongside a randomized controlled trial in 229 patients with severe secondary peritonitis and an acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE)-II score >= 11 from two academic and five regional teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. After the index laparotomy, patients were randomly allocated to an on-demand or a planned-relaparotomy strategy. Primary resource-utilization data were used to estimate mean total costs per patient during the index admission and after discharge until 1 year after the index operation. Overall differences in costs between the on-demand relaparotomy strategy and the planned strategy, as well as relative differences across several clinical subgroups, were evaluated. Results: Costs were substantially lower in the on-demand group (mean, (sic)65,768 versus (sic)83,450 per patient in the planned group; mean absolute difference, (sic)17,682; 95% CI, (sic)5,062 to (sic)29,004). Relative differences in mean total costs per patient (approximately 21%) were robust to various alternative assumptions. Planned relaparotomy consistently generated more costs across the whole range of different courses of disease (quick recovery and few resources used on one end of the spectrum; slow recovery and many resources used on the other end). This difference in costs between the two surgical strategies also did not vary significantly across several clinical subgroups. Conclusions: The reduction in societal costs renders the on-demand strategy a more-efficient relaparotomy strategy in patients with severe peritonitis. These differences were found across the full range of healthcare resources as well as across patients with different courses of diseas