Displaying all 3 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Shafie AA, Tan YP, Ng CH
    Heart Fail Rev, 2018 01;23(1):131-145.
    PMID: 29124528 DOI: 10.1007/s10741-017-9661-0
    The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review of the costing methodological approaches adopted by published cost-of-illness (COI) studies. A systematic review was performed to identify cost-of-illness studies of heart failure published between January 2003 and September 2015 via computerized databases such as Pubmed, Wiley Online, Science Direct, Web of Science, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). Costs reported in the original studies were converted to 2014 international dollars (Int$). Thirty five out of 4972 studies met the inclusion criteria. Nineteen out of the 35 studies reported the costs as annual cost per patient, ranging from Int$ 908.00 to Int$ 84,434.00, while nine studies reported costs as per hospitalization, ranging from Int$ 3780.00 to Int$ 34,233.00. Cost of heart failure increased as condition of heart failure worsened from New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I to NYHA class IV. Hospitalization cost was found to be the main cost driver to the total health care cost. The annual cost of heart failure ranges from Int$ 908 to Int$ 40,971 per patient. The reported cost estimates were inconsistent across the COI studies, mainly due to the variation in term of methodological approaches such as disease definition, epidemiological approach of study, study perspective, cost disaggregation, estimation of resource utilization, valuation of unit cost components, and data sources used. Such variation will affect the reliability, consistency, validity, and relevance of the cost estimates across studies.
    Matched MeSH terms: Health Care Costs/trends*
  2. McDonald SA, Azzeri A, Shabaruddin FH, Dahlui M, Tan SS, Kamarulzaman A, et al.
    Appl Health Econ Health Policy, 2018 12;16(6):847-857.
    PMID: 30145775 DOI: 10.1007/s40258-018-0425-3
    INTRODUCTION: The World Health Organisation (WHO) has set ambitious goals to reduce the global disease burden associated with, and eventually eliminate, viral hepatitis.

    OBJECTIVE: To assist with achieving these goals and to inform the development of a national strategic plan for Malaysia, we estimated the long-term burden incurred by the care and management of patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. We compared cumulative healthcare costs and disease burden under different treatment cascade scenarios.

    METHODS: We attached direct costs for the management/care of chronically HCV-infected patients to a previously developed clinical disease progression model. Under assumptions regarding disease stage-specific proportions of model-predicted HCV patients within care, annual numbers of patients initiated on antiviral treatment and distribution of treatments over stage, we projected the healthcare costs and disease burden [in disability-adjusted life-years (DALY)] in 2018-2040 under four treatment scenarios: (A) no treatment/baseline; (B) pre-2018 standard of care (pegylated interferon/ribavirin); (C) gradual scale-up in direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment uptake that does not meet the WHO 2030 treatment uptake target; (D) scale-up in DAA treatment uptake that meets the WHO 2030 target.

    RESULTS: Scenario D, while achieving the WHO 2030 target and averting 253,500 DALYs compared with the pre-2018 standard of care B, incurred the highest direct patient costs over the period 2018-2030: US$890 million (95% uncertainty interval 653-1271). When including screening programme costs, the total cost was estimated at US$952 million, which was 12% higher than the estimated total cost of scenario C.

    CONCLUSIONS: The scale-up to meet the WHO 2030 target may be achievable with appropriately high governmental commitment to the expansion of HCV screening to bring sufficient undiagnosed chronically infected patients into the treatment pathway.

    Matched MeSH terms: Health Care Costs/trends*
  3. Kananatu K
    Asia Pac J Public Health, 2002;14(1):23-8.
    PMID: 12597514
    This paper presents an overview of the Malaysian healthcare system and its method of financing. The development of the healthcare delivery system in Malaysia is commendable. However, the strength and weaknesses of the public healthcare system and the financing problems encountered are also discussed. Cost of healthcare and funding of both the public and private sectors were also revealed. One must optimise the advantages of operating a health financing scheme which is affordable and controllable which contribute towards cost-containment and quality assurance. Thus, there is a need for the establishment of a National Healthcare Financing, a mechanism to sustain the healthcare delivery network and operate it as a viable option. A model of the National Health Financing Scheme (NHFS) was proposed.
    Matched MeSH terms: Health Care Costs/trends
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

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

External Links