METHODS: A data set of Thai AD patients, representing unique demographic and clinical characteristics, was bootstrapped to generate a baseline cohort of 50 000 patients. Each patient was cloned and assigned to donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine, memantine, or no treatment. Correlated changes in cognitive and behavioral status over time were developed using patient-level data. Treatment effects were obtained from the most recent network meta-analysis. Treatment persistence; mortality; and predictive equations for functional status, costs (Thai baht in 2017), and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) were derived from country-specific real-world data.
RESULTS: From a societal perspective, only the prescription of donepezil to AD patients with all disease-severity levels was found to be cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio): 138 524 Thai baht/QALY ($4062/QALY)]. Regardless of whether the treatment-stopping rule when the mini-mental state examination score <10 was introduced, providing early treatment with donepezil to mild AD patients further reduced the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Extensive sensitivity analyses indicated robust simulation findings.
CONCLUSIONS: Discrete-event simulation greatly enhances the real-world representativeness of decision-analytic models for AD. Donepezil is the most cost-effective treatment option for AD in Thailand and is worth being considered for universal financial coverage. Application of DES in heath technology assessment should be encouraged, especially when the validity of the model is questionable with classical modeling methods.
METHODS: A cost and outcome study was conducted using a retrospective cohort database from four tertiary hospitals. All patients with high-risk surgeries visiting the hospitals from 2011 to 2017 were included. Outcomes included major postsurgical complications, length of stay (LOS), in-hospital death, and total healthcare costs. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors of postsurgical outcomes.
RESULTS: A total of 14,930 patients were identified with an average age of 57.7 ± 17.0 years and 34.9% being male. Gastrointestinal (GI) procedures were the most common high-risk procedures, accounting for 54.9% of the patients, followed by cardiovascular (CV) procedures (25.2%). Approximately 27.2% of the patients experienced major postsurgical complications. The top three complications were respiratory failure (14.0%), renal failure (3.5%), and myocardial infarction (3.4%). In-hospital death was 10.0%. The median LOS was 9 days. The median total costs of all included patients were 2,592 US$(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.
DATA SOURCES: We conducted a systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, Tufts CEA registry, Cochrane CENTRAL, and the UK National Health Services Economic Evaluation Database from 2009 to 2014.
STUDY SELECTION: All cost-effectiveness studies evaluating asthma medication(s) were included. Clinical evidence type, "E," was classified as efficacy-based if the evidence was from an explanatory randomized controlled trial(s) or meta-analysis, while evidence from pragmatic trial(s) or observational study(s) was classified as effectiveness-based. We defined three times the World Health Organization cost-effectiveness willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold or less as a favorable cost-effectiveness finding. Logistic regression tested the likelihood of favorable versus unfavorable cost-effectiveness findings against the type of "E."
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: 25 cost-effectiveness studies were included. Ten (40.0%) studies were effectiveness-based, yet 15 (60.0%) studies were efficacy-based. Of 17 studies using endpoints that could be compared to WTP threshold, 7 out of 8 (87.5%) effectiveness-based studies yielded favorable cost-effectiveness results, whereas 4 out of 9 (44.4%) efficacy-based studies yielded favorable cost-effectiveness results. The adjusted odds ratio was 15.12 (95% confidence interval; 0.59 to 388.75) for effectiveness-based versus efficacy-based achieving favorable cost-effectiveness findings. More asthma cost-effectiveness studies used efficacy-based evidence. Studies using effectiveness-based evidence trended toward being more likely to disseminate favorable cost-effective findings than those using efficacy. Health policy decision makers should pay attention to the type of clinical evidence used in cost-effectiveness studies for accurate interpretation and application.