Displaying publications 81 - 89 of 89 in total

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Dahlui, M., Hishamshah, M.I., Rahman, A.J. A, Shamsuddin, K., Aljunid, S.M.
    MyJurnal
    A cost-utility analysis was performed desferrioxamine treatment in thalctssaemia patients at two tertiary hospitals in Malaysia in 2004. A hundred and twelve transfusion dependent thalassaemia patients were grouped according to the status of desferrioxamine; optimum and sulwptimum. Cost analysis was from a patient and hospital perspectives while Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) was the health outcome of choice. Incremental Cost·Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) was also stipulated to show the difference in cost for an additional QALY if patient currently on suboptimum desferrioxamine to switch using optimum desferrioxamine. Results on cost analysis showed the mean cost of treatment for thalassaemia patients on optimum desferrioxamirie was higher than those on sub·optimum desferrioxamine; (RM14, 775.00+SDRM4,737.00 and RM10,780+RM3,655, respectively). QALYs were 19.186+6.591 and 9.859+5275 in the optimum and suboptirnum group, respectively. Costutility analysis showed the cost per QALYs in optimum desferrioxamine group was RM59,045.00 compared to RM44,665.00 in suboptimum desferrioxamine group. ICER of patients on sub-optimum desferrioxamine switching to optimum desferrioxarnine was only RM420.39. Sensitivity analysis showed that the results were robust in the best and worst scenarios. In conclusion, although it is expensive for thalassaemia patients to use optimum desferrioxamine compared to sub-optimum desferrioxamine, the cost per QALYs gained was undoubtedly low.
    Matched MeSH terms: Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  2. Ramdzan AR, Manaf MRA, Aizuddin AN, Latiff ZA, Teik KW, Ch'ng GS, et al.
    PMID: 34444091 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18168330
    Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Approximately 3-5% of CRCs are associated with hereditary cancer syndromes. Individuals who harbor germline mutations are at an increased risk of developing early onset CRC, as well as extracolonic tumors. Genetic testing can identify genes that cause these syndromes. Early detection could facilitate the initiation of targeted prevention strategies and surveillance for CRC patients and their families. The aim of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of CRC genetic testing. We utilized a cross-sectional design to determine the cost-effectiveness of CRC genetic testing as compared to the usual screening method (iFOBT) from the provider's perspective. Data on costs and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of 200 CRC patients from three specialist general hospitals were collected. A mixed-methods approach of activity-based costing, top-down costing, and extracted information from a clinical pathway was used to estimate provider costs. Patients and family members' HRQoL were measured using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. Data from the Malaysian Study on Cancer Survival (MySCan) were used to calculate patient survival. Cost-effectiveness was measured as cost per life-year (LY) and cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The provider cost for CRC genetic testing was high as compared to that for the current screening method. The current practice for screening is cost-saving as compared to genetic testing. Using a 10-year survival analysis, the estimated number of LYs gained for CRC patients through genetic testing was 0.92 years, and the number of QALYs gained was 1.53 years. The cost per LY gained and cost per QALY gained were calculated. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) showed that genetic testing dominates iFOBT testing. CRC genetic testing is cost-effective and could be considered as routine CRC screening for clinical practice.
    Matched MeSH terms: Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  3. Mohd-Dom TN, Wan-Puteh SE, Muhd-Nur A, Ayob R, Abdul-Manaf MR, Abdul-Muttalib K, et al.
    Value Health Reg Issues, 2014 May;3:117-123.
    PMID: 29702916 DOI: 10.1016/j.vhri.2014.04.012
    OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the national public sector specialist periodontal program in the management of periodontal disease.
    METHODS: This was a multicenter, time motion, prospective, economic evaluation study involving a total of 165 patients with periodontitis recruited from five selected specialist periodontal clinics. Treatment costs were measured in 2012 Malaysian ringgit (MYR) and estimated from the societal perspective using step-down and activity-based costing methods, and substantiated by clinical pathways. A cost-effectiveness analysis was done to compare the specialist periodontal program with a hypothetical scenario in which patients attend biannual dental visits only for regular dental check-up and scaling. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was defined as the difference in cost per gain in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and clinical attachment levels (CALs). One-way scenario-based sensitivity analyses were carried out to assess the uncertainty of inputs.
    RESULTS: The average cost for managing patients with periodontitis was MYR 376 per outpatient visit and MYR 2820 per annum. Clinically, a gain of an average of 0.3 mm of CAL was attained at post-treatment (paired t test, P < .001). Patients gained an average of 3.8 QALY post-treatment (paired t test, P < .001). For cost-effectiveness analysis, the specialist periodontal program was more cost-effective than the hypothesized biannual dental visits, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of MYR 451 and MYR 5713 per additional QALY and millimeter CAL gained, respectively.
    CONCLUSIONS: It is very cost-effective for the public sector to provide specialist periodontal treatment for patients with periodontitis according to the World Health Organization criteria and when compared with conventional biannual dental treatment.
    Matched MeSH terms: Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  4. Abdul Aziz AF, Mohd Nordin NA, Muhd Nur A, Sulong S, Aljunid SM
    BMC Geriatr, 2020 02 18;20(1):70.
    PMID: 32070291 DOI: 10.1186/s12877-020-1453-z
    BACKGROUND: The delivery of post stroke care is fragmented even in advanced public healthcare systems, globally. Primary care teams are entrusted to provide longer term care for stroke survivors in most developing countries. The integrated Care Pathway for Post Stroke patients (iCaPPS©) was designed to guide primary care teams to incorporate further rehabilitation and regular screening for post stroke complications among patients residing at home in communities, using the shared-care approach, especially in areas with limited access to specialist stroke care services. The iCaPPS© addressed coordination of rehabilitation and screening for post stroke complications which were absent in the current conventional care of patients managed at public primary care healthcentres. This study aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness and impact of iCaPPS© on quality-adjusted- life-years (QALY) compared with current conventional monitoring at public primary care healthcentres.

    METHODS: A pragmatic healthcentre-based cluster randomised controlled trial-within trial on 151 post stroke patients from 10 public primary care facilities in Peninsular Malaysia was conducted to evaluate QALY of patients managed with iCaPPS© (n = 86) vs conventional care (n = 65) for 6 months. Costs from societal perspective were calculated, using combination of top down and activity-based costing methods. The 5-level EQ5D (EQ-5D-5 L) was used to calculate health state utility scores. Cost per QALY and incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) were determined. Differences within groups were determined using Mann-Whitney tests.

    RESULTS: Total costs for 6 months treatment with iCaPPS© was MYR790.34, while conventional care cost MYR527.22. Median QALY for iCaPPS© was 0.55 (0,1.65) compared to conventional care 0.32 (0, 0.73) (z = - 0.21, p = 0.84). Cost per QALY for iCaPPS© was MYR1436.98, conventional care was MYR1647.56. The ICER was MYR1144.00, equivalent to 3.7% of per capita GDP (2012 prices).

    CONCLUSIONS: Management of post stroke patients in the community using iCaPPS© costs less per QALY compared to current conventional care and is very cost effective.

    TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial Registration number ACTRN12616001322426. Registered 21 September 2016. (Retrospectively registered).

    Matched MeSH terms: Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  5. Ezat SW, Aljunid S
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 2010;11(4):943-51.
    PMID: 21133606
    OBJECTIVES: Cervical cancer (CC) had the second highest incidence of female cancers in Malaysia in 2003-2006. Prevention is possible by both Pap smear screening and HPV vaccination with either the bivalent vaccine (BV) or the quadrivalent vaccine (QV). In the present study, cost effectiveness options were compared for three programs i.e. screening via Pap smear; modeling of HPV vaccination (QV and BV) and combined strategy (screening plus vaccination). A scenario based sensitivity analysis was conducted using screening population coverages (40-80%) and costs of vaccines (RM 100-200/dose) were calculated.

    METHODS: This was an economic burden, cross sectional study in 2006-2009 of respondents interviewed from six public Gynecology-Oncology hospitals. Methods included expert panel discussions to estimate treatment costs of CC, genital warts and vulva/vagina cancers by severity and direct interviews with respondents using costing and SF-36 quality of life questionnaires.

    RESULTS: A total of 502 cervical cancer patients participated with a mean age at 53.3±11.2 years and a mean marriage length of 27.7±12.1 years, Malays accounting for 44.2%. Cost/quality adjusted life year (QALY) for Pap smear in the base case was RM 1,215 and RM 1,100 at increased screening coverage. With QV only, in base case it was RM 15,662 and RM 24,203 when the vaccination price was increased. With BV only, the respective figures were RM 1,359,057 and RM 2,530,018. For QV combined strategy cost/QALY in the base case it was RM 4,937, reducing to RM 3,395 in the best case and rising to RM 7,992 in the worst case scenario. With the BV combined strategy, these three cost/QALYs were RM 6,624, RM 4,033 and RM 10,543. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) showed that screening at 70% coverage or higher was highly cost effective at RM 946.74 per QALYs saved but this was preceded by best case combined strategy with QV at RM 515.29 per QALYs saved.

    CONCLUSIONS: QV is more cost effective than BV. The QV combined strategy had a higher CE than any method including Pap smear screening at high population coverage.
    Matched MeSH terms: Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  6. Wan Puteh WP, Aljunid S
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 2010;11(1):79-90.
    PMID: 20593935
    INTRODUCTION: Cervical cancers (CC) demonstrate the second highest incidence of female cancers in Malaysia. The costs of chronic management have a high impact on nation's health cost and patient's quality of life that can be avoided by better screening and HPV vaccination.

    METHODOLOGY: Respondents were interviewed from six public Gynecology-Oncology hospitals. Methods include experts' panel discussions to estimate treatment costs by severity and direct interviews with respondents using costing and SF-36 quality of life (QOL) questionnaires. Three options were compared i.e. screening via Pap smear; quadrivalent HPV Vaccination and combined strategy (screening plus vaccination). Scenario based sensitivity analysis using screening population coverage (40-80%) and costs of vaccine (RM 300-400/dose) were calculated.

    RESULTS: 502 cervical pre invasive and invasive cervical cancer (ICC) patients participated in the study. Mean age was 53.3 +/- 11.2 years, educated till secondary level (39.4%), Malays (44.2%) and married for 27.73 +/- 12.1 years. Life expectancy gained from vaccination is 13.04 years and average Quality Adjusted Life Years saved (QALYs) is 24.4 in vaccinated vs 6.29 in unvaccinated. Cost/QALYs for Pap smear at base case is RM 1,214.96/QALYs and RM 1,100.01 at increased screening coverage; for HPV Vaccination base case is at RM 35,346.79 and RM 46,530.08 when vaccination price is higher. In combined strategy, base case is RM 11,289.58; RM 7,712.74 at best case and RM 14,590.37 at worst case scenario. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) showed that screening at 70% coverage or higher is highly cost effective at RM 946.74 per QALYs saved and this is followed by combined strategy at RM 35,346.67 per QALYs saved.

    CONCLUSION: Vaccination increase life expectancy with better QOL of women when cancer can be avoided. Cost effective strategies will include increasing the Pap smear coverage to 70% or higher. Since feasibility and long term screening adherence is doubtful among Malaysian women, vaccination of young women is a more cost effective strategy against cervical cancers.
    Matched MeSH terms: Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  7. Lim YW, Shafie AA, Chua GN, Ahmad Hassali MA
    Value Health, 2017 09;20(8):1131-1138.
    PMID: 28964445 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.04.002
    BACKGROUND: One major challenge in prioritizing health care using cost-effectiveness (CE) information is when alternatives are more expensive but more effective than existing technology. In such a situation, an external criterion in the form of a CE threshold that reflects the willingness to pay (WTP) per quality-adjusted life-year is necessary.

    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.

    Matched MeSH terms: Quality-Adjusted Life Years*
  8. Surendra NK, Abdul Manaf MR, Hooi LS, Bavanandan S, Mohamad Nor FS, Firdaus Khan SS, et al.
    PLoS One, 2019;14(10):e0218422.
    PMID: 31644577 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218422
    OBJECTIVES: In Malaysia, there is exponential growth of patients on dialysis. Dialysis treatment consumes a considerable portion of healthcare expenditure. Comparative assessment of their cost effectiveness can assist in providing a rational basis for preference of dialysis modalities.

    METHODS: A cost utility study of hemodialysis (HD) and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) was conducted from a Ministry of Health (MOH) perspective. A Markov model was also developed to investigate the cost effectiveness of increasing uptake of incident CAPD to 55% and 60% versus current practice of 40% CAPD in a five-year temporal horizon. A scenario with 30% CAPD was also measured. The costs and utilities were sourced from published data which were collected as part of this study. The transitional probabilities and survival estimates were obtained from the Malaysia Dialysis and Transplant Registry (MDTR). The outcome measures were cost per life year (LY), cost per quality adjusted LY (QALY) and incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the Markov model. Sensitivity analyses were performed.

    RESULTS: LYs saved for HD was 4.15 years and 3.70 years for CAPD. QALYs saved for HD was 3.544 years and 3.348 for CAPD. Cost per LY saved was RM39,791 for HD and RM37,576 for CAPD. The cost per QALY gained was RM46,595 for HD and RM41,527 for CAPD. The Markov model showed commencement of CAPD in 50% of ESRD patients as initial dialysis modality was very cost-effective versus current practice of 40% within MOH. Reduction in CAPD use was associated with higher costs and a small devaluation in QALYs.

    CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest provision of both modalities is fiscally feasible; increasing CAPD as initial dialysis modality would be more cost-effective.

    Matched MeSH terms: Quality-Adjusted Life Years*
  9. Surendra NK, Abdul Manaf MR, Hooi LS, Bavanandan S, Mohamad Nor FS, Shah Firdaus Khan S, et al.
    BMC Nephrol, 2019 04 30;20(1):151.
    PMID: 31039745 DOI: 10.1186/s12882-019-1326-x
    BACKGROUND: Health related quality of life (HRQOL) is an important predictor of clinical outcomes for End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) patients and to establish quality adjusted life years (QALYs) for economic evaluation studies. This study aims to measure the health utilities and to identify socio-demographic and clinical factors associated with HRQOL for haemodialysis (HD) and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) in Malaysia.

    METHODS: A total of 141 patients (77 HD and 64 CAPD) from 1 federal and four state hospitals participated in this cross-sectional study. Patients were randomly selected from the National Renal Registry (NRR) using a stratified random sampling. The EQ-5D-3 L questionnaire was used to measure HRQOL. Variables investigated include dialysis modalities, sociodemographic characteristics, co-morbidities and biochemical markers. Utilities are measured on an ordinal scale of 0-1, where 1 indicates full health and 0 indicates death.

    RESULTS: The mean utility scores were 0.854 ± 0.181 and 0.905 ± 0.124 (p > 0.05) and the mean Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores were 76.2 ± 12.90 and 77.1 ± 10.26 (p > 0.05) for HD and CAPD patients respectively. There was a significant difference in problems reported between HD (35.1%) and CAPD (15.6%) on usual activities dimension (p = 0.009). The proportion of patients having problems in the pain/discomfort domain in both modalities was high (34.0%). Haemoglobin (

    Matched MeSH terms: Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links