Methods: Fifteen countries of SA and SEA categorized as HE and LE, represented by the representatives of the national nephrology societies, participated in this questionnaire and interview-based assessment of the impact of economic status on renal care.
Results: Average incidence and prevalence of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) per million population (pmp) are 1.8 times and 3.3 times higher in HE. Hemodialysis is the main renal replacement therapy (RRT) (HE-68%, LE-63%). Funding of dialysis in HE is mainly by state (65%) or insurance bodies (30%); out of pocket expenses (OOPE) are high in LE (41%). Highest cost for hemodialysis is in Brunei and Singapore, and lowest in Myanmar and Nepal. Median number of dialysis machines/1000 ESKD population is 110 in HE and 53 in LE. Average number of machines/dialysis units in HE is 2.7 times higher than LE. The HE countries have 9 times more dialysis centers pmp (median HE-17, LE-02) and 16 times more nephrologist density (median HE-14.8 ppm, LE-0.94 ppm). Dialysis sessions >2/week is frequently followed in HE (84%) and <2/week in LE (64%). "On-demand" hemodialysis (<2 sessions/week) is prevalent in LE. Hemodialysis dropout rates at one year are lower in HE (12.3%; LE 53.4%), death being the major cause (HE-93.6%; LE-43.8%); renal transplants constitute 4% (Brunei) to 39% (Hong Kong) of the RRT in HE. ESKD burden is expected to increase >10% in all the HE countries except Taiwan, 10%-20% in the majority of LE countries.
Conclusion: Economic disparity in SA and SEA is reflected by poor dialysis infrastructure and penetration, inadequate manpower, higher OOPE, higher dialysis dropout rates, and lesser renal transplantations in LE countries. Utility of RRT can be improved by state funding and better insurance coverage.
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 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
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to collect real-world cost and HRQOL data, and investigate their associations with multiple disease-severity indicators among AD patients in Thailand.
METHODS: We recruited AD patients aged ≥60 years accompanied by their caregivers at a university-affiliated tertiary hospital. A one-time structured interview was conducted to collect disease-severity indicators, HRQOL, and caregiving information using standardized tools. The hospital's database was used to retrieve healthcare resource utilization occurred over 6 months preceding the interview date. Costs were annualized and stratified based on cognitive status. Generalized linear models were employed to evaluate determinants of costs and HRQOL.
RESULTS: Among 148 community-dwelling patients, average annual total societal costs of AD care were $8014 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $7295-$8844) per patient. Total costs of patients with severe stage ($9860; 95% CI: $8785-$11 328) were almost twice as high as those of mild stage ($5524; 95% CI: $4649-$6593). The major cost driver was direct medical costs, particularly those incurred by AD prescriptions. Functional status was the strongest determinant for both total costs and patient's HRQOL (P value
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Household costs were estimated from patient-level surveys collected from four hospitals between 2013 and 2016. Direct costs including medical and associated travel costs, and indirect costs due to lost productivity were included. One hundred and fifty-two malaria cases were enrolled: P. knowlesi (n=108), P. vivax (n=22), P. falciparum (n=16), and P. malariae (n=6). Costs were inflated to 2023 Malaysian Ringgits and reported in United States dollars (US$). Across all cases, the mean total costs were US$131 (SD=102), with productivity losses accounting for 58% of costs (US$76; SD=70). P. vivax had the highest mean total household cost at US$199 (SD=174), followed by P. knowlesi and P. falciparum at US$119 (SD=81 and SD=83, respectively), and P. malariae (US$99; SD=42). Most patients (80%) experienced direct health costs above 10% of monthly income, with 58 (38%) patients experiencing health spending over 25% of monthly income, consistent with catastrophic health expenditure.
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Despite Malaysia's free health-system care for malaria, patients and families face other related medical, travel, and indirect costs. Household out-of-pocket costs were driven by productivity losses; primarily attributed to infections in working-aged males in rural agricultural-based occupations. Costs for P. vivax were higher than those of P. knowlesi and P. falciparum. This may be attributable to a younger age profile and the longer treatment required to clear the liver-stage parasites of P. vivax.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from 3 to 12 April 2020. The health belief model (HBM) was used to assess predictors of the intent to receive the vaccine and the WTP.
RESULTS: A total of 1,159 complete responses was received. The majority reported a definite intent to receive the vaccine (48.2%), followed by a probable intent (29.8%) and a possible intent (16.3%). Both items under the perceived benefits construct in the HBM, namely believe the vaccination decreases the chance of infection (OR = 2.51, 95% CI 1.19-5.26) and the vaccination makes them feel less worry (OR = 2.19, 95% CI 1.03-4.65), were found to have the highest significant odds of a definite intention to take the vaccine. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) for the amount that participants were willing to pay for a dose of COVID-19 vaccine was MYR$134.0 (SD±79.2) [US$30.66 ± 18.12]. Most of the participants were willing to pay an amount of MYR$100 [US$23] (28.9%) and MYR$50 [US$11.5] (27.2%) for the vaccine. The higher marginal WTP for the vaccine was influenced by no affordability barriers as well as by socio-economic factors, such as higher education levels, professional and managerial occupations and higher incomes.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrate the utility of HBM constructs in understanding COVID-19 vaccination intention and WTP.