SNAKEBITE DOES COSTEFFECTIVENESS MATTER - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 13
About This Presentation
Title:

SNAKEBITE DOES COSTEFFECTIVENESS MATTER

Description:

indirect costs, eg lost productivity. WHAT IS OUT THERE? Systematic review of the literature: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:66
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 14
Provided by: snakebitei
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: SNAKEBITE DOES COSTEFFECTIVENESS MATTER


1
SNAKEBITE DOES COST-EFFECTIVENESS MATTER??
2
  • anarchy reigns! (Warrell 2008)
  • and the absence of information certainly doesnt
    help

3
ECONOMIC FACTORS
  • cost of antivenom
  • cost of treatment
  • cost of sequelae
  • indirect costs, eg lost productivity

4
WHAT IS OUT THERE?
  • Systematic review of the literature
  • Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of
    Science, Scopus, CINAHL
  • Online sources WHO, DNDi, AVRU, LSTM

5
(No Transcript)
6
Relevant papers
  • Supply 27
  • Burden 20
  • Cost 8
  • Economic evaluation 2

7
Cost and economic evaluation
  • There is some indication of antivenom cost
  • Occasional mention of treatment/hospital costs
  • No description of long-term sequelae cost
  • No economic evaluation

8
What is economic evaluation?
  • Comparison of two or more alternative courses of
    action in terms of both costs and consequences
    (so not just how much something costs)
  • Different analyses cost-effectiveness
    cost-utility cost-minimisation cost-benefit

9
Cost-effectiveness
  • a comparison of the relative value of two
    different treatment strategies, usually expressed
    as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio or
    ICER. Costs are measured in dollars,
    effectiveness is measured in relevant natural
    units. An ICER is calculated using the following
    formula
  • ICER cost drug A cost drug B
  • effectiveness drug A effectiveness drug B

10
  • antivenom A is a new AV for a local snake
    species. It costs 24 per vial.
  • the comparator AV B costs 4 per vial.
  • rate of death using AV A is 12 and using AV B is
    17.
  • 240-40 200 4,000/death avoided
  • 0.12-0.17 0.05

11
  • How can economic evaluation help?
  • Does it matter?

12
  • Quantify some of the issues surrounding
    snakebite, particularly in terms of cost and
    impact
  • Contribute to an accurate assessment of burden
  • Allow for quantifiable assessment of treatment

13
  • Put numbers in the form of signs in front
    of people, and the world tends to pay attention
    to these numbers
  • Attention to cost-effectiveness in developing
    world
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com