Assessing micro- vs macro-costing approaches for treating appendicitis in children with appendicectomy or non-operatively

OBJECTIVES: We conducted a health economic sub-study within a feasibility RCT comparing a non-operative treatment pathway as an alternative to appendicectomy for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children. The objectives were to understand and assess data collection tools and methods and to determine indicative costs and benefits assessing the feasibility of conducting a full economic evaluation within the definitive trial. METHODS: We compared different methods of estimating treatment costs including micro-costing, hospital administrative data (PLICS) and health system (NHS) reference costs. We compared two different HRQoL instruments (CHU-9D and EQ-5D-5L) in terms of data completeness and sensitivity to change over time, including potential ceiling effects. We also explored how the timing of data collection and duration of the analysis could affect QALYs (Quality Adjusted Life Years) and the results of the cost-utility analysis (CUA) within the future RCT. RESULTS: Using a micro-costing approach, the total per treatment costs were in alignment with hospital administrative data (PLICS). Average health system reference cost data (macro-costing using NHS costs) could potentially underestimate these treatment costs, particularly for non-operative treatment. Costs incurred following hospital discharge in the primary care setting were minimal, and limited family borne costs were reported by parents/carers. While both HRQoL instruments performed relatively well, our results highlight the problem of ceiling effect and the importance of the timing of data collection and the duration of the analysis in any future assessment using QALYs and CUA. CONCLUSIONS: We highlighted the importance of obtaining accurate individual-patient cost data when conducting economic evaluations. Our results suggest that timing of data collection and duration of the assessment are important considerations when evaluating cost-effectiveness and reporting cost per QALY. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15830435

The impact of trisomy 21 on epidemiology, management, and outcomes of congenital duodenal obstruction: a population-based study

Abstract: Purpose: Congenital duodenal obstruction (CDO) is associated with trisomy 21 (T21), or Down’s syndrome, in around a third of infants. The aim of this study was to explore the impact of T21 on the epidemiology, management, and outcomes of infants with CDO. Methods: Data were prospectively collected from specialist neonatal surgical centres in the United Kingdom over a 12 month period from March 2016 using established population-based methodology for all babies with CDO. Infants with T21 were compared to those without any chromosomal anomaly. Results: Of 102 infants with CDO that underwent operative repair, T21 was present in 33 [32% (95% CI 23–41%)] babies. Cardiac anomalies were more common in those with T21 compared to those without a chromosomal anomaly (91 vs 17%, p < 0.001), whereas associated gastrointestinal anomalies were less common in infants with T21 (3 vs 12%, p = 0.03). Surgical management was not influenced by T21. Time to achieve full enteral feed, need for repeat related surgery, and mortality were similar between groups. Infants with T21 had a longer median initial inpatient stay (23 vs 16.5 days, p = 0.02). Conclusions: Infants with T21 have a higher incidence of cardiac anomalies and a longer initial inpatient stay; however, it does not change CDO management or outcomes. This information is important for prenatal and postnatal counselling of parents of infants with CDO and T21

The impact of trisomy 21 on epidemiology, management, and outcomes of congenital duodenal obstruction: a population-based study

Abstract: Purpose: Congenital duodenal obstruction (CDO) is associated with trisomy 21 (T21), or Down’s syndrome, in around a third of infants. The aim of this study was to explore the impact of T21 on the epidemiology, management, and outcomes of infants with CDO. Methods: Data were prospectively collected from specialist neonatal surgical centres in the United Kingdom over a 12 month period from March 2016 using established population-based methodology for all babies with CDO. Infants with T21 were compared to those without any chromosomal anomaly. Results: Of 102 infants with CDO that underwent operative repair, T21 was present in 33 [32% (95% CI 23–41%)] babies. Cardiac anomalies were more common in those with T21 compared to those without a chromosomal anomaly (91 vs 17%, p < 0.001), whereas associated gastrointestinal anomalies were less common in infants with T21 (3 vs 12%, p = 0.03). Surgical management was not influenced by T21. Time to achieve full enteral feed, need for repeat related surgery, and mortality were similar between groups. Infants with T21 had a longer median initial inpatient stay (23 vs 16.5 days, p = 0.02). Conclusions: Infants with T21 have a higher incidence of cardiac anomalies and a longer initial inpatient stay; however, it does not change CDO management or outcomes. This information is important for prenatal and postnatal counselling of parents of infants with CDO and T21

Mortality from gastrointestinal congenital anomalies at 264 hospitals in 74 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries: a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study

Summary Background Congenital anomalies are the fifth leading cause of mortality in children younger than 5 years globally. Many gastrointestinal congenital anomalies are fatal without timely access to neonatal surgical care, but few studies have been done on these conditions in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared outcomes of the seven most common gastrointestinal congenital anomalies in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries globally, and identified factors associated with mortality. Methods We did a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of patients younger than 16 years, presenting to hospital for the first time with oesophageal atresia, congenital diaphragmatic hernia, intestinal atresia, gastroschisis, exomphalos, anorectal malformation, and Hirschsprung’s disease. Recruitment was of consecutive patients for a minimum of 1 month between October, 2018, and April, 2019. We collected data on patient demographics, clinical status, interventions, and outcomes using the REDCap platform. Patients were followed up for 30 days after primary intervention, or 30 days after admission if they did not receive an intervention. The primary outcome was all-cause, in-hospital mortality for all conditions combined and each condition individually, stratified by country income status. We did a complete case analysis. Findings We included 3849 patients with 3975 study conditions (560 with oesophageal atresia, 448 with congenital diaphragmatic hernia, 681 with intestinal atresia, 453 with gastroschisis, 325 with exomphalos, 991 with anorectal malformation, and 517 with Hirschsprung’s disease) from 264 hospitals (89 in high-income countries, 166 in middleincome countries, and nine in low-income countries) in 74 countries. Of the 3849 patients, 2231 (58·0%) were male. Median gestational age at birth was 38 weeks (IQR 36–39) and median bodyweight at presentation was 2·8 kg (2·3–3·3). Mortality among all patients was 37 (39·8%) of 93 in low-income countries, 583 (20·4%) of 2860 in middle-income countries, and 50 (5·6%) of 896 in high-income countries (p<0·0001 between all country income groups). Gastroschisis had the greatest difference in mortality between country income strata (nine [90·0%] of ten in lowincome countries, 97 [31·9%] of 304 in middle-income countries, and two [1·4%] of 139 in high-income countries; p≤0·0001 between all country income groups). Factors significantly associated with higher mortality for all patients combined included country income status (low-income vs high-income countries, risk ratio 2·78 [95% CI 1·88–4·11], p<0·0001; middle-income vs high-income countries, 2·11 [1·59–2·79], p<0·0001), sepsis at presentation (1·20 [1·04–1·40], p=0·016), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score at primary intervention (ASA 4–5 vs ASA 1–2, 1·82 [1·40–2·35], p<0·0001; ASA 3 vs ASA 1–2, 1·58, [1·30–1·92], p<0·0001]), surgical safety checklist not used (1·39 [1·02–1·90], p=0·035), and ventilation or parenteral nutrition unavailable when needed (ventilation 1·96, [1·41–2·71], p=0·0001; parenteral nutrition 1·35, [1·05–1·74], p=0·018). Administration of parenteral nutrition (0·61, [0·47–0·79], p=0·0002) and use of a peripherally inserted central catheter (0·65 [0·50–0·86], p=0·0024) or percutaneous central line (0·69 [0·48–1·00], p=0·049) were associated with lower mortality. Interpretation Unacceptable differences in mortality exist for gastrointestinal congenital anomalies between lowincome, middle-income, and high-income countries. Improving access to quality neonatal surgical care in LMICs will be vital to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 3.2 of ending preventable deaths in neonates and children younger than 5 years by 2030

Assessing micro-vs macro-costing approaches for treating appendicitis in children with appendicectomy or non-operatively

Objectives: we conducted a health economic sub-study within a feasibility RCT comparing a non-operative treatment pathway as an alternative to appendicectomy for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children. The objectives were to understand and assess data collection tools and methods and to determine indicative costs and benefits assessing the feasibility of conducting a full economic evaluation within the definitive trial.Methods: we compared different methods of estimating treatment costs including micro-costing, hospital administrative data (PLICS) and health system (NHS) reference costs. We compared two different HRQoL instruments (CHU-9D and EQ-5D-5L) in terms of data completeness and sensitivity to change over time, including potential ceiling effects. We also explored how the timing of data collection and duration of the analysis could affect QALYs (Quality Adjusted Life Years) and the results of the cost-utility analysis (CUA) within the future RCT.Results: using a micro-costing approach, the total per treatment costs were in alignment with hospital administrative data (PLICS). Average health system reference cost data (macro-costing using NHS costs) could potentially underestimate these treatment costs, particularly for non-operative treatment. Costs incurred following hospital discharge in the primary care setting were minimal, and limited family borne costs were reported by parents/carers. While both HRQoL instruments performed relatively well, our results highlight the problem of ceiling effect and the importance of the timing of data collection and the duration of the analysis in any future assessment using QALYs and CUA.Conclusions: we highlighted the importance of obtaining accurate individual-patient cost data when conducting economic evaluations. Our results suggest that timing of data collection and duration of the assessment are important considerations when evaluating cost-effectiveness and reporting cost per QALY.<br/