Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Combined Active
and Passive versus Passive Leprosy Case Detection
Alone in Thailand
Weena Primkaew
Raj Pracha Samasai Institute
Department of disease control, Thailand
Problems and Its Significance
• 2007: Prevalence rate = 0.17 / 10 000 inhabitants.
• Delay in diagnosis
• New case with grade 2 disability not decline.
- 1998 to 2007 has been between 11.4% and 11.5%
2
Proportion of grade 2 disability among newly detected cases:
1985-2007
%
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
198 5
198 7
198 9
199 1
199 3
199 5
199 7
199 9
200 1
200 3
200 5
200 7
YEAR
3
Problems and Its Significance
• Case finding is one of the core activities of leprosy elimination and control.
• Two method of case finding:
- Active case detection method (ACD): Rapid Village Survey,
Contact exam, School exam
- Passive case detection method (PCD): Self reporting
• The budget is limited.
4
General Objective
• To identify the most cost-effectiveness strategy for
new case detection of leprosy in non-endemic and
endemic area of Thailand.
5
Specific Objectives
1) To calculate the total cost of each case detection method
from health provider as well as consumer point of view.
2) To analyze outcomes in term of total number of new cases
detected of each method.
3) To analyze the cost-effectiveness of case detection methods
(combined ACD and PCD method compare to the PCD alone)
according to the endemicity of leprosy.
6
Conceptual Framework
Cost
-Provider
-Patient
Outcomes
ACD+PCD
-No. of newly detected leprosy case
Cost / 1 case detected
Endemic area
compare
Non-endemic area
Cost / 1 case detected
Cost
-Provider
-Patient
PCD alone
Outcomes
- No. of newly detected leprosy case
22
7
Conceptual Framework (cont.)
Incremental cost analysis (ICA)
No. of cases detected (case)
Cost (Baht)
PCD
alone
ACD
PCD
&
PCD
PCD
alone
Activity
ICA =
ACD
&
PCD
PCD
Activity
Cost of ACD+PCD – Cost of PCD alone
No. of cases detected from ACD+PCD – No. of cases detected from PCD alone
8
Methodology
• Study Design: Retrospective descriptive study.
• Study Area: - There are 12 regions in Thailand.
- Divided into 2 groups.
Area
No. of region
Newly detected case
Non- endemic area
7
1-5O cases
Endemic area
4
>50 cases
9
Methodology (cont.)
• Study population:
• The 60 providers interviewed who responsibility the leprosy
control program at regional, provincial, district level and
health center.
• The total of newly detected cases in 2006 for selected areas
is 51 cases.
• Interviewed 42 cases (6 cases went to other provinces,
3 cases died)
10
Methodology (cont.)
• Exclusion criteria:
- patients which past history of leprosy are not included in
this study : relapse, re-instate case.
• Sampling Technique:
• Stratified two stages sampling
11
12
Data Collection and Calculation
1. Calculation of costs :
•
Total costs for Provider Perspective
Cost items
Recurrent Costs:
-Personnel
-Material supply
-Training program
-Social mobilization
- RVS implementation
Unit of measurement
Baht/year
Baht/year
Baht/year
Baht/year
Baht/year
Source of data
Secondary data
Secondary data
Secondary data
Secondary data
Secondary data
13
Data Collection and Calculation (cont.)
• Total Costs for Patient Side
Category

Unit of measurement
Source of data
- Traveling cost
Baht/year
Primary data
- Food cost
Baht/year
Primary data
-Time cost
Baht/year
Primary data
Direct cost (patient)
14
Data Collection and Calculation (cont.)
• Total Costs for Patient Side (cont.)

Category
Unit of measurement
Source of data
Indirect cost (relative)
- Traveling cost
Baht/year
Primary data
- Food cost
Baht/year
Primary data
-Time cost
Baht/year
Primary data
15
Data Collection and Calculation (cont.)
2. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis:
• Calculate by dividing the total cost of each case detection
activities with total number of newly detected cases from each
case detection activities.
16
Results and Discussions
1. Analyzing costs and effectiveness (Provider’s perspective)
1.1 Calculation of costs for each method of case finding activities.
Table1 Total costs of case finding activities for each area
Area
Non-endemic
DPCR 4
DPCR 8
DPCR 11
Total
Total costs (Baht)
ACD&PCD
PCD alone
279,268.00
163,734.00
237,336.40
680,338.40
266,311.00
112,825.60
361,368.80
740,508.40
17
Results and Discussions
1. Analyzing costs and effectiveness (Provider’s perspective)
1.1 Calculation of costs for each method of case finding activities.
Table1 Total costs of case finding activities for each area (cont.)
Area
Total costs (Baht)
ACD&PCD
PCD alone
203,113.07
159,691.00
185,139.60
199,518.16
148,283.20
123,467.00
167,358.00
160,613.60
Endemic
DPCR 5
DPCR 6
DPCR 7
DPCR 10
18
Results and Discussions
1.2 Calculation of cost-effectiveness for each method of case finding
activities. (provider’s perspective)
Table 2 Cost-effectiveness of case finding activities for each region
Area
ACD&PCD
PCD alone
C/E ratio (baht)
No .of case
C/E ratio (baht)
No .of case
Non-end.
DPCR 4
139,634
2
133,156
2
DPCR8
18,193
9
37,609
3
DPCR11
47,467
5
120,456
3
Total
42,521.15
16
92,563.55
8
19
Results and Discussions
1.2 Calculation of cost-effectiveness for each method of case finding activities.
(provider’s perspective)
Table 2 Cost-effectiveness of case finding activities for each region (cont.)
Area
Endemic
DPCR 5
DPCR 6
DPCR 7
DPCR 10
Total
ACD&PCD
C/E ratio (baht)
No .of case
50,778
23,142
28,503
39,340
4
0
8
7
19
PCD alone
C/E ratio (baht)
No .of case
37,071
55,786
160,614
74,965
4
0
3
1
8
20
Results and Discussions
21
2. Analyzing costs and effectiveness (Patient’s perspective)
Table 3 Cost-effectiveness of case finding activities in each area
Area
Method
Costs (฿)
No. of patient interviewed
C/E (฿)
ACD&PCD
PCD alone
1,220
520
2
1
610
520
DPCR 8
ACD&PCD
PCD alone
976
1,096
8
3
122
365
DPCR 11
ACD&PCD
PCD alone
3,149
1,380
5
3
630
460
Total
ACD&PCD
PCD alone
5,345
2,996
15
8
1,362
1,345
Non-endemic
DPCR 4
Results and Discussions
22
2. Analyzing costs and effectiveness (Patient’s perspective) (cont.)
Table 3 Cost-effectiveness of case finding activities in each area (cont.)
Area
Method
Costs (฿)
No. of patient interviewed
C/E (฿)
ACD&PCD
PCD alone
60
2,108
2
3
30
703
DPCR 6
ACD&PCD
PCD alone
0
0
0
0
0
0
DPCR 7
ACD&PCD
PCD alone
160
340
6
3
27
113
DPCR 10
ACD&PCD
PCD alone
1,049
0
6
0
175
0
Total
ACD&PCD
PCD alone
1,269
2,448
14
6
232
816
Endemic
DPCR 5
Conclusions
• The total cost from provider perspective of ACD&PCD
was 1,427,800 baht for founding the 35 leprosy newly
detected cases (1 case: 40,794 baht)
• The total cost from provider perspective of PCD alone
was 1,340,230 baht for founding the 16 leprosy newly
detected cases (1 case: 83,764 baht)
23
Conclusions (cont.)
• In non-endemic area, the C/E ratio of PCD alone is 2.2
times higher than the C/E ratio of ACD&PCD.
• In endemic area, the C/E ratio of PCD alone is 1.9
times higher than the C/E ratio of ACD&PCD.
• Because the no. of newly detected cases in endemic
areas > non-endemic areas.
24
Conclusions (cont.)
The total cost from patient perspective
• In non-endemic areas, they are 2.2 times higher than in endemic area.
• The C/E ratio of ACD&PCD in non-endemic areas is 1,362 baht and in
endemic areas is 232 baht.
• The C/E ratio of PCD alone in non-endemic areas is 1,345 baht and in
endemic areas is 816 baht.
• The combined ACD&PCD method successfully detected more
number of cases than PCD alone method.
25
Limitation of study
•
•
•
•
•
Recall bias of the primary data from patient and provider side.
The two compared methods were carried out under different setting.
We can not measure intangible costs (stigma of leprosy).
The study result is difficult to be generalized.
Some data are still missing:- capital cost, purchased dates, value of
equipment or building are not recorded.
• The cost incurred by national leprosy program to provide supervision
and monitoring was not calculated in this study.
26
Policy implication
• This study could be used as a basic guideline for leprosy
program manager, and policy maker to make a policy
planning about leprosy control program.
• The combined ACD & PCD method should be given more
priority. Therefore, the allocation of the budget for case
finding activities should take endemicity of targeted areas
into consideration.
27
Policy implication (cont.)
•
•
•
The policy maker should use the solution provided in this study as
reference information to conduct the social mobilization activities.
If the social mobilization is carried out in all villages (100%)
coverage, the cost will be higher than conducting only 50% or 75%
of the all villages.
But it should be kept in mind that the outcome of this activity is not
only the no. of cases but also the leprosy awareness of the
community.
28
Acknowledgements
I owe thanks to:• NLR that provided funding.
• Dr. Chantal Herberholz, Prof. Pirom Kamolratanakul, and the others
(thesis committee)
• Ms. Oraphin Mathew, Dr. Somchye Rungtrakulchai,
• Dr. Krisada Mahotarn, Mrs. Silatham Sermritthirong
• Leprosy related officers of DPCR, Provincial, District, staff of RPSI
and the leprosy affected persons
29
30