Cost-effectiveness of Alzheimer's disease CSF biomarkers and amyloid-PET in early-onset cognitive impairment diagnosis

This study aimed at determining the cost-effectiveness of amyloid-positron emission tomography (PET) compared to Alzheimer's disease (AD) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers (amyloid-?42, total-Tau and phosphorylated-Tau) for the diagnosis of AD in patients with early-onset cognitive impairment. A decision tree model using a national health care perspective was developed to compare the costs and effectiveness associated with Amyloid-PET and AD CSF biomarkers. Available evidence from the literature and primary data from Hospital Clínic de Barcelona were used to inform the model and calculate the efficiency of these diagnostic alternatives. Medical visits and diagnostic procedures were considered and reported in €2020. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio to measure the cost per % of correct diagnoses detected and we perform one-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to assess the uncertainty of these results. Compared with AD CSF biomarkers, Amyloid-PET resulted in 7.40% more correctly diagnosed cases of AD, with an incremental total mean cost of €146,854.80 per 100 cases. We found a 50% of probability that Amyloid-PET was cost-effective for a willingness to pay (WTP) of €19,840.39 per correct case detected. Using a WTP of €75,000, the probability that it is cost-effective reached a maximum of 76.9%, thus leading to a conclusion that Amyloid-PET is not a cost-effective technique compared to AD CSF biomarkers, unless the funder is willing to pay a minimum of €19,840.39 to detect one more correct case. Furthermore, obtaining CSF provides simultaneous information on amyloid ? and tau biomarkers and allows other biomarkers to be analyzed at a relatively low cost.© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany

EQUIPT: protocol of a comparative effectiveness research study evaluating cross-context transferability of economic evidence on tobacco control

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.This article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund.Tobacco smoking claims 700 000 lives every year in Europe and the cost of tobacco smoking in the EU is estimated between €98 and €130 billion annually; direct medical care costs and indirect costs such as workday losses each represent half of this amount. Policymakers all across Europe are in need of bespoke information on the economic and wider returns of investing in evidence-based tobacco control, including smoking cessation agendas. EQUIPT is designed to test the transferability of one such economic evidence base-the English Tobacco Return on Investment (ROI) tool-to other EU member states

Changing current practice in urology: Improving guideline development and implementation through stakeholder engagement

Effective stakeholder integration for guideline development should improve outcomes and adherence to clinical practice guidelines

Cost-effectiveness of increasing the reach of smoking cessation interventions in Germany: results from the EQUIPTMOD

Aims: To evaluate costs, effects and cost effectiveness of increased reach of specific smoking cessation interventions in Germany. Design: A Markov-based state transition return on investment model (EQUIPTMOD) was used to evaluate current smoking cessation interventions as well as two prospective investment scenarios. A healthcare perspective (extended to include out-of-pocket payments) with lifetime horizon was considered. A probabilistic analysis was used to assess uncertainty around predicted estimates. Setting: Germany. Participants: Cohort of current smoking population (18+ years) in Germany. Interventions: Interventions included group-based behavioral support, financial incentive programs and varenicline. For Prospective Scenario 1 the reach of group-based behavioral support, financial incentive program and varenicline was increased by 1% of yearly quit attempts (=57,915 quit attempts), while Prospective Scenario 2 represented a higher reach mirroring the levels observed in England. Measurements: EQUIPTMOD considered reach, intervention cost, number of quitters, QALYs gained, cost effectiveness and return on investment. Findings: The highest returns through reduction in smoking-related healthcare costs were seen for the financial incentive program (€2.71 per €1 invested), followed by that of group-based behavioral support (€1.63 per €1 invested), compared with no interventions. Varenicline had lower returns (€1.02 per €1 invested) than the other two interventions. At the population level, Prospective Scenario 1 led to 15,034 QALYs gained and €27 million cost-savings, compared with Current Investment. Intervention effects and reach contributed most to the uncertainty around the return-on-investment estimates. At a hypothetical willingness-to-pay threshold of only €5,000, the probability of being cost effective is around 75% for Prospective Scenario 1. Conclusions Increasing the reach of group-based behavioral support, financial incentives and varenicline for smoking cessation by just 1% of current annual quit attempts provides a strategy to German policy makers that improves the population’s health outcomes and that may be considered cost-effective

Study protocol of cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of a biopsychosocial multidisciplinary intervention in the evolution of non-specific sub-acute low back pain in the working population: cluster randomised trial.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Background: Low back pain (LBP), with high incidence and prevalence rate, is one of the most common reasons to consult the health system and is responsible for a significant amount of sick leave, leading to high health and social costs. The objective of the study is to assess the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis of a multidisciplinary biopsychosocial educational group intervention (MBEGI) of non-specific sub-acute LBP in comparison with the usual care in the working population recruited in primary healthcare centres. Methods/design: The study design is a cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis of a MBEGI in comparison with the usual care of non-specific sub-acute LBP.Measures on effectiveness and costs of both interventions will be obtained from a cluster randomised controlled clinical trial carried out in 38 Catalan primary health care centres, enrolling 932 patients between 18 and 65 years old with a diagnosis of non-specific sub-acute LBP. Effectiveness measures are: pharmaceutical treatments, work sick leave (% and duration in days), Roland Morris disability, McGill pain intensity, Fear Avoidance Beliefs (FAB) and Golberg Questionnaires. Utility measures will be calculated from the SF-12. The analysis will be performed from a social perspective. The temporal horizon is at 3 months (change to chronic LBP) and 12 months (evaluate the outcomes at long term. Assessment of outcomes will be blinded and will follow the intention-to-treat principle. Discussion: We hope to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of MBEGI, see an improvement in the patients' quality of life, achieve a reduction in the duration of episodes and the chronicity of non-specific low back pain, and be able to report a decrease in the social costs. If the intervention is cost-effectiveness and cost-utility, it could be applied to Primary Health Care Centres. Trial registration: ISRCTN: ISRCTN5871969

Economic evaluation of three populational screening strategies for cervical cancer in the county of Valles Occidental: CRICERVA clinical trial

Copyright @ 2011 Acera et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.A high percentage of cervical cancer cases have not undergone cytological tests within 10 years prior to diagnosis. Different population interventions could improve coverage in the public system, although costs will also increase. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and the costs of three types of population interventions to increase the number of female participants in the screening programmes for cancer of the cervix carried out by Primary Care in four basic health care areas.Fondo de Investigación Sanitaria del Instituto Carlos III de Madri