Li Xiao, Bilcke Joke, Asare Ernest O, Wenger Catherine, Kwon Jiye, Bont Louis, Beutels Philippe, Pitzer Virginia E
Centre for Health Economics Research and Modelling Infectious Diseases (CHERMID), University of Antwerp, Belgium.
Public Health Modeling Unit, Yale School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States.
medRxiv. 2024 Jul 17:2024.07.17.24310217. doi: 10.1101/2024.07.17.24310217.
Non-disease-specific WHO-CHOICE unit costs are often used in cost and cost-effectiveness studies in the absence of country-specific data. This study aims to compare reported country-specific disease costs and the corresponding WHO-CHOICE estimates. We use generically defined "diarrhea" (including rotavirus diarrhea) and pathogen-specific "respiratory syncytial virus (RSV)" disease as examples.
We updated systematic reviews for both diseases in low-income (LICs), lower-middle-income (LMICs) and upper-middle-income (UMICs) countries. Diarrheal (including a sub-analysis of rotavirus-specific) and RSV-specific outpatient and inpatient costs per episode were extracted and compared with WHO-CHOICE estimates in the same countries. If a consistent pattern of under- or over-estimation was identified, we quantified the magnitude of the discrepancy. All costs were updated to 2022 international dollar values.
Out of 1975 new records identified, 23 new cost studies were included. Including previous reviews, we retained 31 diarrhea and 16 RSV studies for comparison. WHO-CHOICE based direct medical costs were similar for diarrheal disease including rotavirus diarrhea, but lower for RSV-related disease. We estimated the cost per episode of diarrhea and RSV in 128 countries. RSV outpatient cost were adjusted by multiplying WHO-CHOICE costs by 6.89 (95% uncertainty interval: 5.58-8.58) in LICs and LMICs and 5.87 (4.95-6.96) in UMICs; RSV inpatient costs were multiplied by 1.43 (1.01-2.01) and 1.36 (0.82-2.27), respectively.
WHO-CHOICE based costs should be used cautiously. They aligned well with studies for diarrheal disease, but underestimate costs of RSV-related disease. More country- and disease-specific cost data are needed, especially for RSV in LICs.
在缺乏特定国家数据的情况下,非疾病特异性的世界卫生组织-选择(WHO-CHOICE)单位成本经常用于成本和成本效益研究。本研究旨在比较已报告的特定国家疾病成本与相应的WHO-CHOICE估计值。我们以通用定义的“腹泻”(包括轮状病毒腹泻)和病原体特异性的“呼吸道合胞病毒(RSV)”疾病为例。
我们更新了低收入国家(LICs)、中低收入国家(LMICs)和中高收入国家(UMICs)这两种疾病的系统评价。提取了腹泻(包括轮状病毒特异性的子分析)和RSV特异性每次发作的门诊和住院成本,并与同一国家的WHO-CHOICE估计值进行比较。如果确定了一致的低估或高估模式,我们对差异的大小进行了量化。所有成本都更新为2022年国际美元价值。
在识别出的1975条新记录中,纳入了23项新的成本研究。包括之前的综述,我们保留了31项腹泻研究和16项RSV研究用于比较。基于WHO-CHOICE的直接医疗成本对于包括轮状病毒腹泻在内的腹泻疾病相似,但对于RSV相关疾病较低。我们估计了128个国家腹泻和RSV每次发作的成本。在LICs和LMICs中,RSV门诊成本通过将WHO-CHOICE成本乘以6.89(95%不确定区间:5.58 - 8.58)进行调整,在UMICs中乘以5.87(4.95 - 6.96);RSV住院成本分别乘以1.43(1.01 - 2.01)和1.36(0.82 - 2.27)。
基于WHO-CHOICE的成本应谨慎使用。它们与腹泻疾病的研究结果吻合良好,但低估了RSV相关疾病的成本。需要更多特定国家和疾病的成本数据,尤其是LICs中关于RSV的成本数据。