Methods: Primary data were collected through a standardized survey, and secondary data analysis was used to derive estimates of the ESRD expenditure.
Results: Total annual expenditure of ESRD by the public sector has grown 94% within a span of 7 years, from Malaysian Ringgit [MYR] 572 million (US dollars [USD] 405 million, purchasing power parity [PPP] 2010) in 2010 to MYR 1.12 billion (USD 785 million, PPP 2016) in 2016. The total ESRD expenditure in 2010 constituted 2.95% of the public sector's total health expenditure, whereas in 2016, the proportion has increased to 4.2%. Only 6% of ESRD expenditure was spent on renal transplantation, and the remaining 94% was spent on dialysis.
Conclusion: The share of ESRD expenditure in total health expenditure for the public sector is considered substantial given only a small proportion of the population is affected by the disease. The rapid increase in expenditure relative to the national total health expenditure should warrant the relevant authorities about sustainability of the existing financing mechanism of ESRD and the importance to institutionalize more drastic preventive measures.
METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional nationwide survey targeting physicians from private medical centres in Malaysia. The survey was conducted using questionnaire having (i) background and demographic data of the physicians, volume of prescription in a day, stock of generic medicines in their hospital pharmacy etc. (ii) their knowledge about bioequivalence (iii) prescribing behavior (iv) physicians' knowledge of quality, safety and efficacy of generic medicines, and their cost (v) perceptions of physicians towards issues pertaining to generic medicines utilization.
RESULTS: A total of 263 questionnaires out of 735 were received, giving a response rate of 35.8%. Of the respondents, 214 (81.4%) were male and 49 (18.6%) were females. The majority of the participants were in the age range of 41-50 years and comprised 49.0% of the respondents. Only 2.3% of physicians were aware of the regulatory limits of bioequivalence standards in Malaysia. Of the respondents, 23.2% agreed that they 'always' write their prescriptions using originator product name whereas 50.2% do it 'usually'. A number of significant associations were found between their knowledge, perceptions about generic medicines and their demographic characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the physicians from private medical centres in Malaysia had negative perceptions about safety, quality and the efficacy of generic medicines. These negative perceptions could be the cause of the limited use of generic medicines in the private medical centres. Therefore, in order to facilitate their use, it is recommended that the physicians need to be reassured and educated about the drug regulatory authority approval system of generic medicines with regard to their bioequivalence, quality, efficacy and safety. Apart from the policy on generic substitution, it would also be recommended to have a national medicine pricing policy, which controls drug prices, in both the public and private sector. These efforts are worthwhile to reduce the drug expenditure and improve the medicine affordability in Malaysia.
METHODS: Through the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Costs in Oncology study, 1,294 newly diagnosed patients with cancer (Ministry of Health [MOH] hospitals [n = 577], a public university hospital [n = 642], private hospitals [n = 75]) were observed in Malaysia. Cost diaries and questionnaires were used to measure incidence of financial toxicity, encompassing financial catastrophe (FC; out-of-pocket costs ≥ 30% of annual household income), medical impoverishment (decrease in household income from above the national poverty line to below that line after subtraction of cancer-related costs), and economic hardship (inability to make necessary household payments). Predictors of financial toxicity were determined using multivariable analyses.
RESULTS: One fifth of patients had private health insurance. Incidence of FC at 1 year was 51% (MOH hospitals, 33%; public university hospital, 65%; private hospitals, 72%). Thirty-three percent of households were impoverished at 1 year. Economic hardship was reported by 47% of families. Risk of FC attributed to conventional medical care alone was 18% (MOH hospitals, 5%; public university hospital, 24%; private hospitals, 67%). Inclusion of expenditures on nonmedical goods and services inflated the risk of financial toxicity in public hospitals. Low-income status, type of hospital, and lack of health insurance were strong predictors of FC.
CONCLUSION: Patients with cancer may not be fully protected against financial hardships, even in settings with universal health coverage. Nonmedical costs also contribute as important drivers of financial toxicity in these settings.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study has retrospectively compared the healthcare utilization and associated costs of pre- and post-PPIM treatment in 413 patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder recruited from three major public hospitals providing psychiatric services in Hong Kong. Patients were categorized into early treatment (≤3 years since diagnosis) and chronic (>3 years) groups, and also whether they were receiving polypharmacy (POP).
RESULTS: It was found that patients who were started on early therapy with no POP had the most favourable outcomes. Overall results of the entire cohort, including both early and late treatments, indicate that there was a slight increase in annual in-patient days (IP) per patient and outpatient visit (OP) by 3.18 and 1.87, respectively, and a decrease in emergency room visit (ER) of 0.9 (p
METHODS: A cost and outcome study was conducted using a retrospective cohort database from four tertiary hospitals. All patients with high-risk surgeries visiting the hospitals from 2011 to 2017 were included. Outcomes included major postsurgical complications, length of stay (LOS), in-hospital death, and total healthcare costs. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors of postsurgical outcomes.
RESULTS: A total of 14,930 patients were identified with an average age of 57.7 ± 17.0 years and 34.9% being male. Gastrointestinal (GI) procedures were the most common high-risk procedures, accounting for 54.9% of the patients, followed by cardiovascular (CV) procedures (25.2%). Approximately 27.2% of the patients experienced major postsurgical complications. The top three complications were respiratory failure (14.0%), renal failure (3.5%), and myocardial infarction (3.4%). In-hospital death was 10.0%. The median LOS was 9 days. The median total costs of all included patients were 2,592 US$(IQR: 1,399-6,168 US$). The patients, who received high-risk GI surgeries and experienced major complications, had significantly increased risk of in-hospital death (OR: 4.53; 95%CI: 3.81-5.38), longer LOS (6.53 days; 95%CI: 2.60-10.46 days) and higher median total costs (2,465 US$; 95%CI: 1,945-2,984 US$), compared to those without major complications. Besides, the patients, who underwent high-risk CV surgeries and developed major complications, resulted in significantly elevated risk of in-hospital death (OR: 2.22; 95%CI: 1.74-2.84) and increased median total costs (2,719 US$; 95%CI: 2,129-3,310 US$), compared to those without major complications.
CONCLUSIONS: Postsurgical complications are a serious problem in Thailand, as they are associated with worsening mortality risk, LOS, and healthcare costs. Clinicians should develop interventions to prevent or effectively treat postsurgical complications to mitigate such burdens.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the economic burden of treating cancer patients.
METHOD: Descriptive cross-sectional cost of illness study in the leading teaching and referral hospital in Kenya, with data collected from the hospital files of sampled adult patients for treatment during 2016.
RESULTS: In total, 412 patient files were reviewed, of which 63.4% (n = 261) were female and 36.6% (n = 151) male. The cost of cancer care is highly dependent on the modality. Most reviewed patients had surgery, chemotherapy and palliative care. The cost of cancer therapy varied with the type of cancer. Patients on chemotherapy alone cost an average of KES 138,207 (USD 1364.3); while those treated with surgery cost an average of KES 128,207 (1265.6), and those on radiotherapy KES 119,036 (1175.1). Some patients had a combination of all three, costing, on average, KES 333,462 (3291.8) per patient during the year.
CONCLUSION: The cost of cancer treatment in Kenya depends on the type of cancer, the modality, cost of medicines and the type of inpatient admission. The greatest contributors are currently the cost of medicines and inpatient admissions. This pilot study can inform future initiatives among the government as well as private and public insurance companies to increase available resources, and better allocate available resources, to more effectively treat patients with cancer in Kenya. The authors will be monitoring developments and conducting further research.
METHODS: Searches were performed from the inception until December 2015 using 13 databases: CAB direct; CEA registry; EconLit; EMBASE; E-library; NHSEED; PAHO; POPLINE; PubMed; Redalyc project; RePEc; SciELO; and WHOLIS. Reference lists of relevant studies and grey literature were also searched. Full economic evaluations of Hib vaccination with results of costs and outcomes were included. The WHO checklist was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. Data from eligible studies were extracted using a standardized data collection form.
RESULTS: Out of 830 articles, 27 were included. Almost half of the studies (12/27) were conducted in high-income countries. Twelve studies (12/27) investigated the Hib vaccine as an addition to the existing vaccination program. Most studies (17/27) examined a 3-dose schedule of Hib vaccine. Nineteen studies (19/27) reported the model used, where all were decision tree models. Most of the studies (23/27) demonstrated an economic value of Hib vaccination programs, key influential parameters being incidence rates of Hib disease and vaccine price.
CONCLUSIONS: Hib vaccination programs are mostly found to be cost-effective across geographic regions and country income levels, and Hib vaccination is recommended for inclusion into all national immunization programs. The findings are expected to support policy-makers for making decisions on allocating limited resources of the Hib vaccination program effectively.
METHODS: Country-specific data from a multinational prospective cohort study, Association of Southeast Asian Nations Costs in Oncology Study, comprising 1,249 cancer survivors were included. Household costs of complementary medicine (healthcare practices or products that are not considered as part of conventional medicine) throughout the first year after cancer diagnosis were measured using cost diaries. Study outcomes comprised (1) shares of household expenditures on complementary medicine from total out-of-pocket costs and health costs that were respectively incurred in relation to cancer, (2) incidence of financial catastrophe (out-of-pocket costs related to cancer ≥ 30% of annual household income), and (3) economic hardship (inability to pay for essential household items or services).
RESULTS: One third of patients reported out-of-pocket household expenditures on complementary medicine in the immediate year after cancer diagnosis, accounting to 20% of the total out-of-pocket costs and 35% of the health costs. Risk of financial catastrophe was higher in households reporting out-of-pocket expenditures on complementary medicine (adjusted odds ratio: 1.39 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.86]). Corresponding odds ratio within patients from low-income households showed that they were substantially more vulnerable: 2.28 (95% CI, 1.41 to 3.68). Expenditures on complementary medicine were, however, not associated with economic hardship in the immediate year after cancer diagnosis.
CONCLUSION: In settings with universal health coverage, integration of subsidized evidence-based complementary medicine into mainstream cancer care may alleviate catastrophic expenditures. However, this must go hand in hand with interventions to reduce the use of nonevidence-based complementary therapies following cancer.