Purpose Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the major causes of mortalities worldwide. This study was conducted to evaluate the direct and indirect costs of coronary artery disease (CAD) in Iran. Patients and Methods This is a prevalence-based cost-of-illness (COI) study that estimates the direct and indirect costs of CAD. The study conducted over a six-month period from April to September in 2017. Patients were recruited from Madani hospital in Tabriz, Iran. A total of 379 patients were investigated from societal perspective. Direct costs were estimated using the bottom-up costing approach and indirect costs were estimated using the Human Capital (HC) approach. A generalized linear model of regression was used to explore the relation between total cost and socio-demographic variables. The total annual mean cost was compared to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita which was reported in the form of Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) index. To deal with uncertainty, one-way sensitivity analysis was performed. Results Total costs per patient in one year were estimated to be IRR 63452290.17 ($PPP 7736.19) at a 95% confidence interval (58191511.73–68713068.60), the biggest part of which is related to direct medical costs with IRR 33884019.53 per year ($PPP 4131.18) (54%). Direct non-medical costs were estimated IRR 1655936.68 ($PPP 201.89) per patient (2%) and indirect costs were estimated IRR 27912333.97 per patient ($PPP 3403.11) (44%), which 62% of indirect costs is related to patients’ work absenteeism. Conclusion This study estimates the direct (56%) and indirect (44%) costs associated with CAD. The study explores the essential drivers of the costs and provides the magnitude of the burden in terms of the share of GDP. The outcomes can be used in priority setting, in particular for cost benefit analysis, and adopting new policies regarding insurance coverage and equity issues.

BackgroundUtility values are a key component of a cost-utility analysis. The EQ-5D and SF-6D are two commonly used measures for deriving utilities. Of particular importance is assessing the performance of these instruments in terms of validity.ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare the performance of the EQ-5D and the SF-6D in different states of breast cancer.Patients and MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study of 163 patients with breast cancer who attended the breast cancer subspecialty clinic affiliated with the breast cancer research center (BCRC) at ACECR, in Tehran, Iran, and were consecutively recruited. Patients completed several questionnaires, including the EQ-5D, SF-36, and general questions regarding their demographic characteristics. Utility values for different states of breast cancer were obtained using predetermined algorithms for the EQ-5D and SF-6D. The distribution of the utility values and the differences between the different states for both instruments were statistically assessed. Furthermore, the agreement between the two instruments was evaluated using intra-class correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots.ResultsThe mean and median EQ-5D utility scores for the total sample were 0.685 and 0.761, respectively. The mean SF-6D utility score for the total sample was 0.653, and the median utility score was 0.640. The mean utility values of the EQ-5D for “state P,” “state R,” “state S,” and “state M” were estimated as 0.674, 0.718, 0.730, and 0.552, respectively. The SF-6D provided mean utility values of 0.638, 0.677, 0.681, and 0.587 for those states. Both instruments assigned statistically significant (P < 0.01) scores for different states. The intra-class correlation for the two measures was 0.677 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.558 - 0.764). The Bland-Altman plot indicated a better agreement on the higher values and that at higher values, the EQ-5D yields a higher score than the SF-6D; this relationship was reversed at lower values.ConclusionsAlthough the two instruments were able to discriminate between various states, the values derived from these instruments were quite different. This distinction could have influenced the conclusions of an economic evaluation. Further research is required to determine which instrument should be used in economic evaluations.

Background Irrational household storage of medicines is a world-wide problem, which triggers medicine wastage as well as its associated harms. This study aimed to include all available evidences from literature to perform a focused examination of the prevalence and factors associated with medicine storage and wastage among urban households. This systematic review and meta-analysis mapped the existing literature on the burden, outcomes, and affective socio-economic factors of medicine storage among urban households. In addition, this study estimated pooled effect sizes for storage and wastage rates. Methods Household surveys evaluating modality, size, costs, and affective factors of medicines storage at home were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, SCOPUS, ProQuest, and Google scholar databases in 2019. Random effect meta-analysis and subgroup analysis were used to pool effect sizes for medicine storage and wastage prevalence among different geographical regions. Results From the 2604 initial records, 20 studies were selected for systematic review and 16 articles were selected for meta-analysis. An overall pooled-prevalence of medicine storage and real wastage rate was 77 and 15%, respectively. In this regard, some significant differences were observed between geographical regions. Southwest Asia region had the highest storage and wastage rates. The most common classes of medicines found in households belonged to the Infective agents for systemic (17.4%) and the Nervous system (16.4%). Moreover, income, education, age, the presence of chronic illness, female gender, and insurance coverage were found to be associated with higher home storage. The most commonly used method of disposal was throwing them in the garbage. Conclusions Factors beyond medical needs were also found to be associated with medicine storage, which urges effective strategies in the supply and demand side of the medicine consumption chain. The first necessary step to mitigate home storage is establishing an adequate legislation and strict enforcement of regulations on dispensing, prescription, and marketing of medicines. Patient’s pressure on excessive prescription, irrational storage, and use of medicines deserve efficient community-centered programs, in order to increase awareness on these issues. So, hazardous consequences of inappropriate disposal should be mitigated by different take back programs, particularly in low and middle income countries.

No abstract

In recent years, there have been substantial advancements in the development of different technologies for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for in-hospital and out of hospital applications. However the effectiveness of these devices is not clearly known. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Cardiohelp compared to other portable ECMO devices. In this systematic review, we searched Medline (via Ovid), Embase, Pubmed, Cochrane Library, SCOPUS, CRD and NICE. Articles were assessed by two independent reviewers for eligibility and quality of the evidence. Studies which compared Cardiohelp to other ECMO devices were included. Seven out of 1316 publication were included in this review, three of them were clinical trials and four were observational studies. The majority of the studies had limited quality. According to the measures of safety, Cardiohelp had safer technological features, but on the other hand, was more complex to use. Considering the effectiveness, Cardiohelp was not statistically different from other technologies. Cardiohelp showed slightly better performance than Centrimag in terms of cost per patient and cost-effectiveness. However, when clinical criteria were used to select the patients with good prognosis to administer the ECMO, incremental cost utility ratios (ICURs) for both Cardiohelp and Centrimag were below the level of willingness-to-pay threshold. According to the measures of safety and effectiveness, ECMO with Cardiohelp was not considerably different from other evaluated technologies. Moreover, ECMO with Cardiohelp or Centrimag can be considered cost-effective, provided that the patients are selected carefully in terms of neurological outcomes.