Underestimated uncertainties. Hospital-at-home for COPD exacerbations and methodological issues in the economic evaluation of healthcare

Economic evaluation has been defined as `the comparative analysis of alternative courses of action in terms of both their costs and consequences’. In an economic evaluation in healthcare, two or more interventions are compared in terms of costs and health outcomes. This results in estimates of the incremental health effects and the incremental costs. If one intervention leads to higher costs as well as more health benefits, an incremental costeffectiveness ratio (ICER) can be calculated. This ratio expresses the cost per additional unit of health gain. An economic evaluation can play a role in policy makers’ decisions on whether the health benefits of an intervention are worth the costs

Societal preferences for granting orphan drugs special status in reimbursement decisions

Background: Orphan drugs, for patients with a rare disease, are increasingly available but often do not meet standard cost-effectiveness criteria for reimbursement. Consequently, policymakers regularly face the dilemma whether to relax these criteria for reimbursing orphan drugs. We examined whether—and why—there would be societal support for such differential treatment of orphan drugs. Methods: We conducted a labelled discrete choice experiment in a sample of the adult population (n = 1,172) in the Netherlands. Respondents were presented with ten choices on whether to reimburse an orphan drug given that a non-orphan drug with similar characteristics would not be reimbursed, because it was not cost-effective, and asked to explain their choices. We used random-intercept logit regression models and inductive coding for analysing the quantitative and qualitative data. Results: Of the respondents, 36.4% consistently chose for reimbursing the orphan drug, mostly because “everyone is entitled to live a healthy life and good quality healthcare”, and 17.3% consistently for not reimbursing the orphan drug, mostly because “[this] is unfair to patients with a common disease”. The remaining 46.3% made alternating choices and were more likely to choose for reimbursing orphan drugs when patients were aged between 1 and 70 years, had moderate disease severity, and considerable health gain from treatment. Conclusions: This study finds considerable support but also strong preference heterogeneity amongst members of the public in the Netherlands for differential treatment of orphan drugs in reimbursement decisions, when these drugs do not meet common cost-effectiveness criteria. However, a substantial minority opposes differential treatment, mostly on moral grounds.</p

Societal preferences for granting orphan drugs special status in reimbursement decisions

Background: Orphan drugs, for patients with a rare disease, are increasingly available but often do not meet standard cost-effectiveness criteria for reimbursement. Consequently, policymakers regularly face the dilemma whether to relax these criteria for reimbursing orphan drugs. We examined whether—and why—there would be societal support for such differential treatment of orphan drugs. Methods: We conducted a labelled discrete choice experiment in a sample of the adult population (n = 1,172) in the Netherlands. Respondents were presented with ten choices on whether to reimburse an orphan drug given that a non-orphan drug with similar characteristics would not be reimbursed, because it was not cost-effective, and asked to explain their choices. We used random-intercept logit regression models and inductive coding for analysing the quantitative and qualitative data. Results: Of the respondents, 36.4% consistently chose for reimbursing the orphan drug, mostly because “everyone is entitled to live a healthy life and good quality healthcare”, and 17.3% consistently for not reimbursing the orphan drug, mostly because “[this] is unfair to patients with a common disease”. The remaining 46.3% made alternating choices and were more likely to choose for reimbursing orphan drugs when patients were aged between 1 and 70 years, had moderate disease severity, and considerable health gain from treatment. Conclusions: This study finds considerable support but also strong preference heterogeneity amongst members of the public in the Netherlands for differential treatment of orphan drugs in reimbursement decisions, when these drugs do not meet common cost-effectiveness criteria. However, a substantial minority opposes differential treatment, mostly on moral grounds.</p

Value-based person-centred integrated care for frail elderly living at home: a quasi-experimental evaluation using multicriteria decision analysis

Objective To evaluate the value of the person-centred, integrated care programme Care Chain Frail Elderly (CCFE) compared with usual care, using multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA). Design In a 12-month quasi-experimental study, triple-aim outcomes were measured at 0, 6 and 12 months by trained interviewers during home-visits. Setting Primary care, community-based elderly care. Participants 384 community-dwelling frail elderly were enrolled. The 12-month completion rate was 70% in both groups. Propensity score matching was used to balance age, gender, marital status, living situation, education, smoking status and 3 month costs prior to baseline between the two groups. Intervention The CCFE is an integrated care programme with unique features like the presence of the elderly and informal caregiver at the multidisciplinary team meetings, and a bundled payment. Primary and secondary outcomes measures The MCDA results in weighted overall value scores that combines the performance on physical functioning, psychological well-being, social relationships and participation, enjoyment of life, resilience, person-centredness, continuity of care and costs, with importance weights of patients, informal caregivers, professionals, payers and policy-makers. Results At 6 months, the overall value scores of CCFE were higher in all stakeholder groups, driven by enjoyment of life (standardised performance scores 0.729 vs 0.685) and person-centredness (0.749 vs 0.663). At 12 months, the overall value scores in both groups were similar from a patient’s perspective, slightly higher for CCFE from an informal caregiver’s and professional’s perspective, and lower for CCFE from a payer’s and policy-maker’s perspective. The latter was driven by a worse performance on physical functioning (0.682 vs 0.731) and higher costs (€22 816 vs €20 680). Conclusions The MCDA indicated that the CCFE is the preferred way of delivering care to frail elderly at 6 months. However, at 12 months, MCDA results showed little difference from the perspective of patients, informal caregivers and professionals, while payers and policy-makers seemed to prefer usual care.publishedVersio

Does the 2013 GOLD classification improve the ability to predict lung function decline, exacerbations and mortality: a post-hoc analysis of the 4-year UPLIFT trial

BACKGROUND: The 2013 GOLD classification system for COPD distinguishes four stages: A (low symptoms, low exacerbation risk), B (high symptoms, low risk), C (low symptoms, high risk) and D (high symptoms, high risk). Assessment of risk is based on exacerbation history and airflow obstruction, whatever results in a higher risk grouping. The previous system was solely based on airflow obstruction. Earlier studies compared the predictive performance of new and old classification systems with regards to mortality and exacerbations. The objective of this study was to compare the ability of both classifications to predict the number of future (total and severe) exacerbations and mortality in a different patient population, and to add an outcome measure to the comparison: lung function decline.METHODS: Patient-level data from the UPLIFT trial were used to analyze 4-year survival in a Weibull model, with GOLD stages at baseline as covariates. A generalized linear model was used to compare the numbers of exacerbations (total and severe) per stage. Analyses were repeated with stages C and D divided into substages depending on lung function and exacerbation history. Lung function decline was analysed in a repeated measures model.RESULTS: Mortality increased from A to D, but there was no difference between B and C. For the previous GOLD stages 2-4, survival curves were clearly separated. Yearly exacerbation rates were: 0.53, 0.72 and 0.80 for stages 2-4; and 0.35, 0.45, 0.58 and 0.74 for A-D. Annual rates of lung function decline were: 47, 38 and 26 ml for stages 2-4 and 44, 48, 38 and 39 for stages A-D. With regards to model fit, the new system performed worse at predicting mortality and lung function decline, and better at predicting exacerbations. Distinguishing between the sub-stages of high-risk led to substantial improvements.CONCLUSIONS: The new classification system is a modest step towards a phenotype approach. It is probably an improvement for the prediction of exacerbations, but a deterioration for predicting mortality and lung function decline.TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00144339 (September 2, 2005)

Adjusting for COPD severity in database research: developing and validating an algorithm

Purpose: When comparing chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) interventions in database research, it is important to adjust for severity. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines grade severity according to lung function. Most databases lack data on lung function. Previous database research has approximated COPD severity using demographics and healthcare utilization. This study aims to derive an algorithm for COPD severity using baseline data from a large respiratory trial (UPLIFT).Methods: Partial proportional odds logit models were developed for probabilities of being in GOLD stages II, III and I V. Concordance between predicted and observed stage was assessed using kappa-statistics. Models were estimated in a random selection of 2/3 of patients and validated in the remainder. The analysis was repeated in a subsample with a balanced distributio

Exploring the Impact of Adding a Respiratory Dimension to the EQ-5D-5L.

Objectives. To evaluate the impact of adding a respiratory dimension (a bolt-on dimension) to the EQ-5D-5L health state valuations. Methods. Based on extensive regression and principal component analyses, 2 respiratory bolt-on candidates were formulated: R1, limitations in physical activities due to shortness of breath, and R2, breathing problems. Valuation interviews for the selected bol