Suchergebnisse

Background: Active disinvestment of healthcare interventions (i.e. discontinuing reimbursement by means of a policy decision) has received limited public support in the past. Previous research has identified four viewpoints on active disinvestment among citizens in the Netherlands. However, it remained unclear how strong these viewpoints are supported by society, and by whom. Therefore, the current study aimed to 1) measure the support for these four viewpoints and 2) assess whether support is associated with background characteristics of citizens. Method: In an online survey, a representative sample of adult citizens in the Netherlands (n = 1794) was asked to rate their agreement with short narratives of the four viewpoints on a 7-point Likert scale. The survey also included questions on sociodemographic characteristics, health status, healthcare utilization, and opinions about responsibility and costs in the healthcare context. Logistic regression models were estimated for each viewpoint to assess the association between viewpoint support and these characteristics. Results: The support for the different viewpoints varied between 46.8% and 57.7% of the sample. Viewpoint support was associated with participants' age, gender, educational level, financial situation, healthcare utilization, opinion on the responsibility of the government for the health of citizens, and opinion on whether the increase in healthcare expenditure and health insurance premiums is considered a problem. Conclusion: Resistance to active disinvestment may partially be explained by the consequences of disinvestment citizens anticipate experiencing themselves. Citizens considering the increase in healthcare expenditure a larger problem were more supportive of disinvestment than those considering it less of a problem.

Objectives Our study investigates the extent to which uptake of a COVID-19 digital contact-tracing (DCT) app among the Dutch population is affected by its configurations, its societal effects, and government policies toward such an app. Methods We performed a discrete choice experiment among Dutch adults including 7 attributes, that is, who gets a notification, waiting time for testing, possibility for shops to refuse customers who have not installed the app, stopping condition for contact tracing, number of people unjustifiably quarantined, number of deaths prevented, and number of households with financial problems prevented. The data were analyzed by means of panel mixed logit models. Results The prevention of deaths and financial problems of households had a very strong influence on the uptake of the app. Predicted app uptake rates ranged from 24% to 78% for the worst and best possible app for these societal effects. We found a strong positive relationship between people's trust in government and people's propensity to install the DCT app. Conclusions The uptake levels we find are much more volatile than the uptake levels predicted in comparable studies that did not include societal effects in their discrete choice experiments. Our finding that the societal effects are a major factor in the uptake of the DCT app results in a chicken-or-the-egg causality dilemma. That is, the societal effects of the app are severely influenced by the uptake of the app, but the uptake of the app is severely influenced by its societal effects.

The current article describes the economic evaluation of interventions to control Campylobacter on chicken meat by means of a cost‐utility analysis. Apart from the methodology used, the main focus of this article is on data gaps and assumptions made, and their impact on results and conclusions. The direct intervention costs, the relative risk, the disease burden (expressed in disability‐adjusted life years (DALYs)), and the costs of illness for the various interventions are necessary inputs for the cost‐utility analysis. The cost‐utility ratio (CUR)—the measure for efficiency—is expressed in net costs per avoided DALY. Most data gaps were of a biological order, but for some interventions, information on costs was also scarce. As a consequence, assumptions had to be made, which had some impact on the estimated CUR. A higher (lower) incidence of Campylobacter infections associated with chicken meat, higher (lower) effectiveness, and lower (higher) intervention costs, respectively, would result in absolute better (worse) CUR estimates. By taking the perspective of all consumers eating Dutch chicken meat, rather than only the Dutch society, absolute better CUR estimates could be obtained. Indirect costs or a shift toward non‐Dutch chicken meat would both result in higher CUR estimates. Despite the assumptions made, three interventions showed for most of the applied sensitivity analyses relatively favorable CUR estimates: limiting fecal leakage during processing, carcass decontamination by dipping in a chemical solution, and the phage therapy. However, all three do have some clauses.

<i>Objectives:</i> To evaluate prenatal screening methods for Down syndrome and neural tube defects (NTD) with regard to costs per detected case and the number of screening-related miscarriages. <i>Methods:</i> The screening methods compared were risk assessment tests, i.e. serum tests and nuchal translucency measurement (NT), and invasive testing through chorionic villus sampling (CVS) or amniocentesis. Costs, the number of cases detected and screening-related miscarriages were calculated using a decision tree model. <i>Results:</i> The costs per detected case of Down syndrome ranged from EUR 98,000 for the first-trimester (serum) double test to EUR 191,000 for invasive testing. If NTD detection was included, the (serum) triple test had the lowest costs, EUR 73,000, per detected case of Down syndrome or NTD. The number of screening-related miscarriages due to invasive diagnostic tests varied from 13 per 100,000 women for the (serum) first- and second-trimester combined test to 914 per 100,000 women for invasive testing. <i>Conclusions:</i> Considering screening for both Down syndrome and NTD favors the triple test in terms of costs per detected case. Compared to invasive testing, risk assessment tests in general substantially lower screening-related miscarriages, which raises the question of whether invasive testing should still be offered in a screening program for Down syndrome.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate to what extent the outcomes of a discrete choice experiment (DCE) differ based on respondents' psychological distance to the decision at hand. Methods: A DCE questionnaire regarding individuals' preferences for genetic screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) within the Dutch national CRC screening program was created. The DCE contained nine D-efficient designed choice tasks and was distributed among two populations that differ in their psychological distance to the decision at hand: 1) a representative sample of the Dutch general population aged 55-65 years, and 2) a sample of Dutch individuals who attended an information appointment regarding colonoscopies following the detection of blood in their stool sample in the CRC screening program. The DCE consisted of four attributes related to the decision whether to participate in genetic screening for CRC: 1) risk of being genetically predisposed, 2) risk of developing CRC, 3) frequency of follow-up colonoscopies, and 4) survival. Direct attribute ranking, dominant decision-making behavior, and relative importance scores (based on panel MIXL) were compared between the two populations. Attribute level estimates were compared with the Swait and Louviere test. Results: The proportion of respondents who both ranked survival as the most important attribute, and showed dominant decision-making behavior for this attribute, was significantly higher in the screened population compared to the general population. The relative importance scores of the attributes significantly differed between populations. Finally, the Swait and Louviere test also revealed significant differences in attribute level estimates in both the populations. Conclusion: The study outcomes differed between populations depending on their psychological distance to the decision. This study shows the importance of adequate sample selection; therefore, it is advocated to increase attention to study sample selection and reporting in DCE studies.

It is widely acknowledged that in order to promote public health and prevent diseases, a wide range of scientific disciplines and sectors beyond the health sector need to be involved. Evidence-based interventions, beyond preventive health interventions targeting disease risk factors and interventions from other sectors, should be developed and implemented. Investing in these preventive health policies is challenging as budgets have to compete with other governmental expenditures. The current study aimed to identify, compare and rank cost-effective preventive interventions targeting metabolic, environmental, occupational and behavioral risk factors. To identify these interventions, a literature search was performed including original full economic evaluations of Western country interventions that had not yet been implemented in the Netherlands. Several workshops were held with experts from different disciplines. In total, 51 different interventions (including 13 cost saving interventions) were identified and ranked based on their incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and potential averted disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), resulting in two rankings of the most cost-effective interventions and one ranking of the 13 cost saving interventions. This approach, resulting in an intersectoral ranking, can assist policy makers in implementing cost-effective preventive action that considers not only the health sector, but also other sectors.

By 2030, more than 80% of Europe's population will live in an urban environment. The urban exposome, consisting of factors such as where we live and work, where and what we eat, our social network, and what chemical and physical hazards we are exposed to, provides important targets to improve population health. The EXPANSE (EXposome Powered tools for healthy living in urbAN SEttings) project will study the impact of the urban exposome on the major contributors to Europe's burden of disease: Cardio-Metabolic and Pulmonary Disease. EXPANSE will address one of the most pertinent questions for urban planners, policy makers, and European citizens: "How to maximize one's health in a modern urban environment?" EXPANSE will take the next step in exposome research by (1) bringing together exposome and health data of more than 55 million adult Europeans and OMICS information for more than 2 million Europeans; (2) perform personalized exposome assessment for 5,000 individuals in five urban regions; (3) applying ultra-high-resolution mass-spectrometry to screen for chemicals in 10,000 blood samples; (4) evaluating the evolution of the exposome and health through the life course; and (5) evaluating the impact of changes in the urban exposome on the burden of cardiometabolic and pulmonary disease. EXPANSE will translate its insights and innovations into research and dissemination tools that will be openly accessible via the EXPANSE toolbox. By applying innovative ethics-by-design throughout the project, the social and ethical acceptability of these tools will be safeguarded. EXPANSE is part of the European Human Exposome Network.

Objectives: Differences between country-specific guidelines for economic evaluations complicate the execution of international economic evaluations. The aim of this study was to develop cross-European recommendations for the identification, measurement and valuation of resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations using a Delphi procedure. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify European guidelines on the execution of economic evaluations or costing studies as part of economic evaluations. Guideline recommendations were extracted by two independent reviewers and formed the basis for the first round of the Delphi study, which was conducted among European health economic experts. During three written rounds, consensus (agreement of 67% or higher) was sought on items concerning the identification, measurement and valuation of costs. Results: Recommendations from 18 guidelines were extracted. Consensus among 26 panellists from 17 European countries was reached on 61 of 68 items. The recommendations from the Delphi study are to adopt a societal perspective, to use patient report for measuring resource use and lost productivity, to value both constructs with use of country-specific standardized/unit costs and to use country-specific discounting rates. Conclusion: This study provides consensus-based cross-European recommendations on how to measure and value resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations. These recommendations are expected to support researchers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers in executing and appraising economic evaluations performed in international contexts.

Objectives: Differences between country-specific guidelines for economic evaluations complicate the execution of international economic evaluations. The aim of this study was to develop cross-European recommendations for the identification, measurement and valuation of resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations using a Delphi procedure. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify European guidelines on the execution of economic evaluations or costing studies as part of economic evaluations. Guideline recommendations were extracted by two independent reviewers and formed the basis for the first round of the Delphi study, which was conducted among European health economic experts. During three written rounds, consensus (agreement of 67% or higher) was sought on items concerning the identification, measurement and valuation of costs. Results: Recommendations from 18 guidelines were extracted. Consensus among 26 panellists from 17 European countries was reached on 61 of 68 items. The recommendations from the Delphi study are to adopt a societal perspective, to use patient report for measuring resource use and lost productivity, to value both constructs with use of country-specific standardized/unit costs and to use country-specific discounting rates. Conclusion: This study provides consensus-based cross-European recommendations on how to measure and value resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations. These recommendations are expected to support researchers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers in executing and appraising economic evaluations performed in international contexts.

Campylobacter bacteria are an important cause of foodborne infections. We estimated the potential costs and benefits of a large number of possible interventions to decrease human exposure to Campylobacter by consumption of chicken meat, which accounts for 20–40% of all cases of human campylobacteriosis in the Netherlands. For this purpose, a farm‐to‐fork risk assessment model was combined with economic analysis and epidemiological data. Reduction of contamination at broiler farms could be efficient in theory. However, it is unclear which hygienic measures need to be taken and the costs can be very high. The experimental treatment of colonized broiler flocks with bacteriophages has proven to be effective and could also be cost efficient, if confirmed in practice. Since a major decrease of infections at the broiler farm is not expected in the short term, additional measures in the processing plant were also considered. At this moment, guaranteed Campylobacter‐free chicken meat at the retail level is not realistic. The most promising interventions in the processing plant are limiting fecal leakage during processing and separation of contaminated and noncontaminated flocks (scheduling), followed by decontamination of the contaminated flock. New (faster and more sensitive) test methods to detect Campylobacter colonization in broilers flocks are a prerequisite for successful scheduling scenarios. Other methods to decrease the contamination of meat of colonized flocks such as freezing and heat treatment are more expensive and/or less effective than chemical decontamination.

OBJECTIVES: Differences between country-specific guidelines for economic evaluations complicate the execution of international economic evaluations. The aim of this study was to develop cross-European recommendations for the identification, measurement and valuation of resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations using a Delphi procedure. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify European guidelines on the execution of economic evaluations or costing studies as part of economic evaluations. Guideline recommendations were extracted by two independent reviewers and formed the basis for the first round of the Delphi study, which was conducted among European health economic experts. During three written rounds, consensus (agreement of 67% or higher) was sought on items concerning the identification, measurement and valuation of costs. RESULTS: Recommendations from 18 guidelines were extracted. Consensus among 26 panellists from 17 European countries was reached on 61 of 68 items. The recommendations from the Delphi study are to adopt a societal perspective, to use patient report for measuring resource use and lost productivity, to value both constructs with use of country-specific standardized/unit costs and to use country-specific discounting rates. CONCLUSION: This study provides consensus-based cross-European recommendations on how to measure and value resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations. These recommendations are expected to support researchers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers in executing and appraising economic evaluations performed in international contexts.