John Denny, Chatterjee Prabir, Murthy Shruti, Bhat Ramesh, Musa Baba Maiyaki
Evidence Synthesis Specialist, Campbell Collaboration, New Delhi, India; PhD Candidate-HTA, Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, The Netherlands.
Executive Director, State Health Systems Resource Center (SHSRC), First Floor, Health Training Centre Building, Bijli Chowk, Kalibadi, Raipur 492001, Chhattisgarh, India.
Indian J Tuberc. 2018 Jul;65(3):208-217. doi: 10.1016/j.ijtb.2017.08.031. Epub 2017 Sep 28.
In India, multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) patients are usually treated in hospitals. Decentralised care model, however, has been suggested as a possible alternative by the World Health Organization (WHO). In the "End TB Strategy", the WHO highlights, as one of the key targets for 2035, that 'no TB-affected families should face catastrophic hardship due to the tuberculosis'. Removal of financial barriers to health-care access and mitigation of catastrophic expenditures are therefore considered vital to achieve the universal health coverage (UHC) goal. Since forgoing healthcare due to the financial constraints is a known fact in India, decentralised care as an intervention choice (as against hospital-based care) might enhance equity provided it is an affordable choice. Thus, an economic evaluation was conducted, from the perspective of the national health system in India, to assess the cost-effectiveness of decentralised care compared to centralised care for MDR-TB.
This study uses a decision-analytic model with a follow-up of two years to assess the expected costs of the decentralised versus the centralised approaches for MDR-TB treatment. A published systematic review of observational studies yielded the MDR-TB treatment outcomes, which included treatment success, treatment default, treatment failure, and mortality parameters. It was observed that these parameters did not vary significantly between the two alternatives. Treatment costs included the following costs: hospital admission costs, clinic costs, visits to laboratory and MDR-TB centre, drug therapy, injections and food. Costs data of drugs, diagnosis, hospital stay and travel to public facilities, based on a simple market survey, were taken from a recently published study on MDR-TB expenditures in the Chhattisgarh state of India. Potential cost savings related to the implementation of decentralised MDR-TB care for all patients who initiated MDR-TB treatment in India were additionally estimated.
Estimated average expected total treatment cost was US$ 3390.56 for the hospital-based model and US$ 1724.1 for the decentralised model for a patient treated for MDR-TB in India, generating potential savings of US$1666.50 per case, with ICER US$ 2382.68 per QALY gained. One of the primary drivers of this difference was the significantly more intensive (thus expensive) stay charges in the hospital. If the costs and treatment probabilities are extrapolated to the whole country, with 48114 MDR-TB patients initiated on treatment in 2017, decentralised care would have additional 1058 patients cured, gain additional 3824 QALYs, and avert 2165 deaths, as compared to centralised care, in India. At various scenarios of coverage rates of decentralised and centralised care the cost difference would range between 23% and 94% for the country.
Our study provides evidence of cost savings for MDR-TB patients if patients choose decentralised treatment in comparison to suggested hospitalisation of these patients for centralised treatment with similar outcomes. The economic evaluation presented in this study expected significant efficiency gains in choice of two treatment options and the cost savings may improve equity. In India, treatment of MDR-TB using decentralised care is expected to result in similar patient outcomes at markedly reduced public health costs compared with centralised care.
在印度,耐多药结核病(MDR-TB)患者通常在医院接受治疗。然而,世界卫生组织(WHO)建议采用分散式护理模式作为一种可能的替代方案。在“终止结核病战略”中,WHO强调,作为2035年的关键目标之一,“任何受结核病影响的家庭都不应因结核病而面临灾难性困境”。因此,消除获得医疗保健的经济障碍和减轻灾难性支出被认为对实现全民健康覆盖(UHC)目标至关重要。由于在印度,因经济限制而放弃医疗保健是一个众所周知的事实,分散式护理作为一种干预选择(与基于医院的护理相对)可能会提高公平性,前提是它是一种负担得起的选择。因此,从印度国家卫生系统的角度进行了一项经济评估,以评估与MDR-TB集中护理相比,分散式护理的成本效益。
本研究使用一个为期两年随访的决策分析模型,以评估MDR-TB治疗的分散式与集中式方法的预期成本。一项已发表的观察性研究的系统评价得出了MDR-TB治疗结果,其中包括治疗成功、治疗中断、治疗失败和死亡率参数。据观察,这两个方案之间这些参数没有显著差异。治疗成本包括以下费用:住院费用、门诊费用、前往实验室和MDR-TB中心的就诊费用、药物治疗、注射和食品。基于一项简单的市场调查,药物、诊断、住院和前往公共设施的交通费用数据取自最近发表的一项关于印度恰蒂斯加尔邦MDR-TB支出的研究。此外,还估计了印度所有开始接受MDR-TB治疗的患者实施分散式MDR-TB护理可能节省的成本。
在印度,接受MDR-TB治疗的患者,基于医院的模式估计平均预期总治疗成本为3390.56美元,分散式模式为1724.1美元,每例可节省1666.50美元,每获得一个质量调整生命年(QALY)的增量成本效益比(ICER)为2382.68美元。造成这种差异的主要驱动因素之一是医院住院费用明显更高(因此更昂贵)。如果将成本和治疗概率推算到全国,2017年有48114名MDR-TB患者开始接受治疗,与集中式护理相比,分散式护理在印度将使另外1058名患者治愈,获得额外3824个QALY,并避免2165例死亡。在分散式和集中式护理覆盖率的各种情况下,该国的成本差异将在23%至94%之间。
我们的研究表明,如果MDR-TB患者选择分散式治疗,与建议将这些患者住院进行集中治疗且结果相似相比,可节省成本。本研究中的经济评估预计在两种治疗方案的选择上会有显著的效率提升,成本节省可能会改善公平性。在印度,与集中式护理相比,使用分散式护理治疗MDR-TB预计会在显著降低公共卫生成本的情况下,使患者获得相似的结果。