MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted at MOH hospitals in Jordan, from August to November 2010. A total of 138 patients and 49 caregivers were involved in the study. An economic evaluation study was used to analyze the burden of hemodialysis treatment at MOH, Jordan. Direct medical costs were estimated through micro and macro costing from the provider's perspective. Patients' and caregivers' costs were included to calculate direct non-medical costs. Human capital approach was employed to evaluate the productivity loss for indirect cost and premature death and potential year life loss was used to estimate the premature death cost.
RESULTS: The total burden of hemodialysis at MOH, Jordan was USD17.70 million per year. Cost per session was $72 and the annual cost per patient was $9976. Direct medical cost was $7.20 million (41%) and direct non-medical cost was $2.02 million (11%). On the other hand, indirect cost (productivity loss) was $8.48 million (48%). All 722 patients on hemodialysis at MOH hospitals consumed 2.7% of MOH budget.
CONCLUSIONS: Costs of treating and managing patients on hemodialysis at MOH hospitals in Jordan are substantial. Therefore, efforts should be taken to slow down the progress of renal failure to save resources and a comparative study with other modalities, such as continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and kidney transplantation, should be considered.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost-effectiveness of universal HLA-B*15:02 screening in preventing carbamazepine-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis in an ethnically diverse Malaysian population.
METHODS: A hybrid model of a decision tree and Markov model was developed to evaluate three strategies for treating newly diagnosed epilepsy among adults: (i) carbamazepine initiation without HLA-B*15:02 screening (current practice); (ii) universal HLA-B*15:02 screening prior to carbamazepine initiation; and (iii) alternative treatment [sodium valproate (VPA)] prescribing without HLA-B*15:02 screening. Base-case analysis and sensitivity analyses were performed over a lifetime time horizon. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated.
RESULTS: Both universal HLA-B*15:02 screening and VPA prescribing were dominated by current practice. Compared with current practice, universal HLA-B*15:02 screening resulted in a loss of 0·0255 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at an additional cost of 707 U.S. dollars (USD); VPA prescribing resulted in a loss of 0·2622 QALYs at an additional cost of USD 4127, owing to estimated differences in antiepileptic treatment efficacy.
CONCLUSIONS: Universal HLA-B*15:02 screening is unlikely to be a cost-effective intervention in Malaysia. However, with the emergence of an ethnically diverse population in many other countries, this may render HLA-B*15:02 screening a viable intervention when an increasing proportion of the population is at risk and an equally effective yet safer antiepileptic drug is available.