Cost-effectiveness analysis of Smart Triage, a data-driven pediatric sepsis triage platform in Eastern Uganda.
Cost-effectiveness analysis
Economic evaluation
Low-middle income country
Pediatric sepsis
Sepsis
Triage
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
31 Aug 2023
31 Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
31
03
2023
accepted:
28
08
2023
medline:
4
9
2023
pubmed:
1
9
2023
entrez:
31
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Sepsis, characterized by organ dysfunction due to presumed or proven infection, has a case-fatality over 20% in severe cases in low-and-middle income countries. Early diagnosis and treatment have proven benefits, prompting our implementation of Smart Triage at Jinja Regional Referral Hospital in Uganda, a program that expedites treatment through a data-driven triage platform. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of Smart Triage to explore its impact on patients and inform multicenter scale up. The parent clinical trial for Smart Triage was pre-post in design, using the proportion of children receiving sepsis treatment within one hour as the primary outcome, a measure linked to mortality benefit in existing literature. We used a decision-analytic model with Monte Carlo simulation to calculate the cost per year-of-life-lost (YLL) averted of Smart Triage from societal, government, and patient perspectives. Healthcare utilization and lost work for seven days post-discharge were translated into costs and productivity losses via secondary linkage data. In 2021 United States dollars, Smart Triage requires an annuitized program cost of only $0.05 per child, but results in $15.32 saved per YLL averted. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of only $3 per YLL averted, well below published cost-effectiveness threshold estimates for Uganda, Smart Triage approaches 100% probability of cost-effectiveness over the baseline manual triage system. This cost-effectiveness was observed from societal, government, and patient perspectives. The cost-effectiveness observed was driven by a reduction in admission that, while explainable by an improved triage mechanism, may also be partially attributable to changes in healthcare utilization influenced by the coronavirus pandemic. However, Smart Triage remains cost-effective in sensitivity analyses introducing a penalty factor of up to 50% in the reduction in admission. Smart Triage's ability to both save costs and avert YLLs indicates that patients benefit both economically and clinically, while its high probability of cost-effectiveness strongly supports multicenter scale up. Areas for further research include the incorporation of years lived with disability when sepsis disability weights in low-resource settings become available and analyzing budget impact during multicenter scale up. NCT04304235 (registered on 11/03/2020, clinicaltrials.gov).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Sepsis, characterized by organ dysfunction due to presumed or proven infection, has a case-fatality over 20% in severe cases in low-and-middle income countries. Early diagnosis and treatment have proven benefits, prompting our implementation of Smart Triage at Jinja Regional Referral Hospital in Uganda, a program that expedites treatment through a data-driven triage platform. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of Smart Triage to explore its impact on patients and inform multicenter scale up.
METHODS
METHODS
The parent clinical trial for Smart Triage was pre-post in design, using the proportion of children receiving sepsis treatment within one hour as the primary outcome, a measure linked to mortality benefit in existing literature. We used a decision-analytic model with Monte Carlo simulation to calculate the cost per year-of-life-lost (YLL) averted of Smart Triage from societal, government, and patient perspectives. Healthcare utilization and lost work for seven days post-discharge were translated into costs and productivity losses via secondary linkage data.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In 2021 United States dollars, Smart Triage requires an annuitized program cost of only $0.05 per child, but results in $15.32 saved per YLL averted. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of only $3 per YLL averted, well below published cost-effectiveness threshold estimates for Uganda, Smart Triage approaches 100% probability of cost-effectiveness over the baseline manual triage system. This cost-effectiveness was observed from societal, government, and patient perspectives. The cost-effectiveness observed was driven by a reduction in admission that, while explainable by an improved triage mechanism, may also be partially attributable to changes in healthcare utilization influenced by the coronavirus pandemic. However, Smart Triage remains cost-effective in sensitivity analyses introducing a penalty factor of up to 50% in the reduction in admission.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Smart Triage's ability to both save costs and avert YLLs indicates that patients benefit both economically and clinically, while its high probability of cost-effectiveness strongly supports multicenter scale up. Areas for further research include the incorporation of years lived with disability when sepsis disability weights in low-resource settings become available and analyzing budget impact during multicenter scale up.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
NCT04304235 (registered on 11/03/2020, clinicaltrials.gov).
Identifiants
pubmed: 37653477
doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09977-5
pii: 10.1186/s12913-023-09977-5
pmc: PMC10468891
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT04304235']
Types de publication
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
932Subventions
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 215695/B/19/Z
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
Soc Sci Med. 2006 Feb;62(4):858-65
pubmed: 16099574
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Jun 3;20(1):493
pubmed: 32493319
Intensive Care Med. 2014 Feb;40(2):182-191
pubmed: 24146003
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Dec 21;17(Suppl 3):830
pubmed: 29297319
BMJ Open. 2015 Nov 25;5(11):e009449
pubmed: 26608641
J Crit Care. 2015 Aug;30(4):861.e9-14
pubmed: 25956595
PLoS One. 2015 May 07;10(5):e0123853
pubmed: 25950443
PLoS One. 2016 Jan 04;11(1):e0145043
pubmed: 26727369
Crit Care Med. 2022 Apr 1;50(4):e340-e350
pubmed: 34593705
BMJ Glob Health. 2018 Nov 5;3(6):e000964
pubmed: 30483412
Arch Dis Child. 2011 Mar;96(3):285-90
pubmed: 21220265
Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Dec 28;15(Suppl 2):108
pubmed: 29297353
Health Policy Plan. 2020 Feb 1;35(1):107-114
pubmed: 31625564
Implement Sci. 2016 Jan 29;11:12
pubmed: 26821910
BMJ. 2002 Oct 19;325(7369):891-4
pubmed: 12386045
Bull World Health Organ. 2015 Feb 1;93(2):118-24
pubmed: 25883405
Crit Care Med. 2019 Oct;47(10):1371-1379
pubmed: 31306176
Glob Health Action. 2018;11(1):1447828
pubmed: 29564962
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Apr 7;17(1):256
pubmed: 28388951
Crit Care Med. 1996 May;24(5):743-52
pubmed: 8706448
JAMA. 2018 Jul 24;320(4):358-367
pubmed: 30043064
Int J Public Health. 2020 Dec;65(9):1623-1633
pubmed: 32997150
Bull World Health Organ. 2006 Apr;84(4):314-9
pubmed: 16628305
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2022 Jan 11;38(1):e13
pubmed: 35007499
Glob Health Action. 2016 Feb 17;9:29417
pubmed: 26899774
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Nov 04;14:539
pubmed: 25363234
BMC Pediatr. 2017 Jan 26;17(1):37
pubmed: 28122537
Intensive Care Med. 2020 Feb;46(Suppl 1):10-67
pubmed: 32030529
Vaccine X. 2021 Apr 02;8:100095
pubmed: 34036262
Lancet. 2020 Jan 18;395(10219):200-211
pubmed: 31954465
PLoS One. 2021 Nov 17;16(11):e0260044
pubmed: 34788338
Intensive Care Med. 2017 Mar;43(3):304-377
pubmed: 28101605
PLoS One. 2018 Mar 16;13(3):e0194187
pubmed: 29547624
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013 Apr;29(2):117-22
pubmed: 23587340
Pediatrics. 2012 Sep;130(3):e676-82
pubmed: 22891229
West Indian Med J. 2014 Dec;63(7):703-10
pubmed: 25867557
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2021 Dec 21;38(1):e1
pubmed: 34931601
BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Nov 19;21(1):1252
pubmed: 34798891
JAMA Pediatr. 2019 Apr 1;173(4):352-362
pubmed: 30742207
PLoS Med. 2012;9(6):e1001238
pubmed: 22719233