AREAS COVERED: In Central Asia, the number of new AIDS cases increased by 29%. It is more endemic in the poor population with variations in the cost of illness. Dengue is prevalent in more than 100 countries, including the Asia-Pacific region. In Southeast Asia, the annual economic burden of dengue fever was between $ 610 and $ 1,384 million, with a per capita cost of $ 1.06 to $ 2.41. Globally, 2.9 billion people are at risk of developing malaria, 90% of whom are residents of the Asia and Pacific region. The annual per capita cost of malaria control ranged from $ 0.11 to $ 39.06 and for elimination from $ 0.18 to $ 27.
EXPERT OPINION: The cost of AIDS, dengue, and malaria varies from country to country due to different health-care systems. The literature review has shown that the cost of dengue disease and malaria is poorly documented.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the health care of FH in countries of the Asia-Pacific region and Southern Hemisphere.
METHODS: A series of questionnaires were completed by key opinion leaders from selected specialist centers in 12 countries concerning aspects of the care of FH, including screening, diagnosis, risk assessment, treatment, teaching/training, and research; the United Kingdom (UK) was used as the international benchmark.
RESULTS: The estimated percentage of patients diagnosed with the condition was low (overall <3%) in all countries, compared with ∼15% in the UK. Underdetection of FH was associated with government expenditure on health care (ϰ = 0.667, P health care system (ϰ = 0.571-0.800, P care for FH, particularly in less economically developed countries. Wider implementation of primary and pediatric care, telehealth services, patient support groups, education/training programs, research activities, and health technology assessments are needed to improve the care of patients with FH in these countries.
METHODS: Patient demography, pre-operative visual acuity, intra-operative complications, post-operative complications and post-operative visual acuity were recorded for two hundred and forty seven of the 400 patients who underwent cataract surgery during a 2-week period. The cost of surgery, which included capital, staff and overhead, and patient care consumable costs were assessed prospectively in 8 randomly sampled patients over a 3-month period. Cost efficiency refers to cost per cataract surgery. Cost effectiveness refers to cost per successful cataract surgery. This is estimated by the ratio of cost efficiency to the proportion of successful cataract surgery. Successful surgery was defined as best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of better than 6/12 at 3 months post-operatively.
RESULTS: Proportion of patients who had post-operative visual acuity of 6/12 or better was higher in phacoemulsification group (94%) than in the ECCE group (81%). Conventional extracapsular cataract surgery with intraocular lens implant costs RM3442 (USD 905.79) and phacoemulsification with intraocular lens implant costs RM4288 (USD 1128.42).
DISCUSSION: There was no significant difference in cost effectiveness between ECCE and phacoemulsification. The cost of cataract surgery in the MOH hospital was found to be high due to the high overhead costs.
OBJECTIVES: To determine a CE threshold for health care interventions in Malaysia.
METHODS: A cross-sectional, contingent valuation study was conducted using a stratified multistage cluster random sampling technique in four states in Malaysia. One thousand thirteen respondents were interviewed in person for their socioeconomic background, quality of life, and WTP for a hypothetical scenario.
RESULTS: The CE thresholds established using the nonparametric Turnbull method ranged from MYR12,810 to MYR22,840 (~US $4,000-US $7,000), whereas those estimated with the parametric interval regression model were between MYR19,929 and MYR28,470 (~US $6,200-US $8,900). Key factors that affected the CE thresholds were education level, estimated monthly household income, and the description of health state scenarios.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that there is no single WTP value for a quality-adjusted life-year. The CE threshold estimated for Malaysia was found to be lower than the threshold value recommended by the World Health Organization.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to (1) measure the cost of health resources utilization by MS patients and (2) to examine the difference in utilization and its attributed costs amongst patients who may have a different course of MS and expanded disability status scale (EDSS) scores.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study using Kuwait National MS registry was conducted to estimate the costs of utilization of resources from 2011 to 2015.
RESULTS: Between the period 2011-2015, 1344 MS patients were included in the registry. The average annual cost per MS patient has increased from $10,271 in 2011 to $17,296 in 2015. Utilization of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) was the main driver of costs reaching 89.9% in 2015. Throughout the five-year period, the occurrence of relapses decreased from 21.8% to 12.2% (p <0.0001). During this same period, ambulatory relapse treatment increased by 5.8% while hospitalizations decreased by 2.6%. Patients with a moderate EDSS score (3.5-6) had the highest average cost (p<0.0001) compared to mild and severe EDSS scores.
CONCLUSIONS: Multiple sclerosis has been a significant economic burden on the Kuwait healthcare system. DMTs are the main driver of cost.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: Key electronic databases including Medline, Embase, Scopus, Global Health, CinAHL, EconLit and Business Source Premier were searched. We also searched the grey literature, specifically websites of leading organizations supporting health care in LMICs. Only studies using benefit incidence analysis (BIA) and/or financing incidence analysis (FIA) as explicit methodology were included. A total of 512 records were obtained from the various sources. The full texts of 87 references were assessed against the selection criteria and 24 were judged appropriate for inclusion. Twelve of the 24 studies originated from sub-Saharan Africa, nine from the Asia-Pacific region, two from Latin America and one from the Middle East. The evidence points to a pro-rich distribution of total health care benefits and progressive financing in both sub-Saharan Africa and Asia-Pacific. In the majority of cases, the distribution of benefits at the primary health care level favoured the poor while hospital level services benefit the better-off. A few Asian countries, namely Thailand, Malaysia and Sri Lanka, maintained a pro-poor distribution of health care benefits and progressive financing.
CONCLUSION: Studies evaluated in this systematic review indicate that health care financing in LMICs benefits the rich more than the poor but the burden of financing also falls more on the rich. There is some evidence that primary health care is pro-poor suggesting a greater investment in such services and removal of barriers to care can enhance equity. The results overall suggest that there are impediments to making health care more accessible to the poor and this must be addressed if universal health coverage is to be a reality.