Ariel Beresniak

In 1993, the World Bank released a global report on the efficacy of health promotion, introducing the disability-adjusted life years (DALY) as a novel indicator. The DALY, a composite metric incorporating temporal and qualitative data, is grounded in preferences regarding disability status. This review delineates the algorithm used to calculate the value of the proposed DALY synthetic indicator and elucidates key methodological challenges associated with its application. In contrast to the quality-adjusted life years approach, derived from multi-attribute utility theory, the DALY stands as an independent synthetic indicator that adopts the assumptions of the Time Trade Off utility technique to define Disability Weights. Claiming to rely on no mathematical or economic theory, DALY users appear to have exempted themselves from verifying whether this indicator meets the classical properties required of all indicators, notably content validity, reliability, specificity, and sensitivity. The DALY concept emerged primarily to facilitate comparisons of the health impacts of various diseases globally within the framework of the Global Burden of Disease initiative, leading to numerous publications in international literature. Despite widespread adoption, the DALY synthetic indicator has prompted significant methodological concerns since its inception, manifesting in inconsistent and non-reproducible results. Given the substantial diffusion of the DALY indicator and its critical role in health impact assessments, a reassessment is warranted. This reconsideration is imperative for enhancing the robustness and reliability of public health decision-making processes.

Background: The FLURESP project is a public health research funded by the European Commission, with the objective to design a methodological framework to assess the cost-effectiveness of existing public health measures against human influenza pandemics. A dataset has been specifically collected in the frame of the Italian health system. As most of interventions against human influenza are relavant against other respiratory diseases pandemics, potential interests in COVID-19 are discussed. Methods: Ten public health measures against human influenza pandemics pandemic were selected to be also relevant to other respiratory virus pandemics such as COVID 19: individual (hand washing, using masks), border control (quarantine, fever screening, border closure), community infection (school closure, class dismissal, social distancing, limitation of public transport), reduction of secondary infections (implementation of antibiotic therapy guidelines), pneumococcal vaccination for at-risk people, development of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) capacity, implementation of life support equipments in ICU, screening interventions, vaccination programs targeting health professional and targeting general population. Results: Using mortality reduction as effectiveness criteria, the most cost-effective strategies are “reduction of secondary infections” and “implementation of life support equipment in ICU”. The least cost-effective option whatever the level of pandemic events are screening interventions and mass vaccination. Conclusions: A number of intervention strategies against human influenza pandemics appears relevant against every respiratory virus, including the COVID-19 event. Measures against pandemics should be considered according to their expected effectiveness but also their costs for the society because they impose substantial burden to the population, confirming the interest of considering cost-effectiveness of public health measures to enlighten decision making.

Background: The FLURESP project is a public health research funded by the European Commission, with the objective to design a methodological framework to assess and compare the cost-effectiveness of existing public health measures against human influenza pandemics in four target countries: France, Italy, Poland and Romania. This article presents the results relevant to the Italian health system using a dataset specifically collected for this purpose. As most of interventions against human influenza are relavant against other respiratory diseases pandemics, potential interests in COVID-19 are discussed.Methods: Eight public health measures against human influenza pandemics pandemic were selected to be also relevant to other respiratory virus pandemics such as COVID 19: 1) individual (hand washing, using masks), 2) border control (quarantine, fever screening, border closure), 3) community infection (school closure, class dismissal, social distancing, limitation of public transport), 4) reduction of secondary infections (implementation of antibiotic therapy guidelines), 5) pneumococcal vaccination for at-risk people, 6) development of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) capacity, 7) implementation of life support equipments in ICU and 8) screening interventions (virus testing).The outcome "achieving a mortality reduction of higher or equal to 40%” has been selected as a meaningful effectiveness criteria from the public health perspective. Cost distributions have been taken into account according to the Italian health system using a uniform distribution. Results: In the frame of the major pandemic event observed in Italy in 2020, the most cost-effective strategies are “reduction of secondary infections” and “implementation of life support equipment in ICU”. The least cost-effective option during a major pandemic event is screening interventions.Conclusions: A number of intervention strategies against human influenza pandemics appears relevant against respiratory virus pandemics in general such as the COVID-19 pandemic. These pandemics are imposing a substantial economic burden in Italy, confirming the interest of considering the cost-effectiveness of public health measures to enlighten decision making.

Background: Data from clinical trials comparing Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) management strategies in patients with dyspepsia are limited. Cost‐effectiveness simulation models might help to identify the optimal strategy.Objective: To assess the cost‐effectiveness of the H. pylori "Test and Treat" (T&T) strategy including the use of urea breath test (UBT) vs symptomatic treatment (ST) and vs upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGE) as a first procedure in patients with dyspepsia.Methods: Three main strategies: “T&T” strategy including the use of UBT, "UGE" and "ST" have been compared using cost‐effectiveness models developed in accordance with the Spanish medical practice. For the model simulations, a time horizon of 4 weeks was considered for the endpoint "Dyspepsia symptoms relief" and 10 years when using "Peptic ulcer avoided" and "Gastric cancer avoided" endpoints.Results: For the endpoint "Dyspepsia symptoms relief", T&T strategy appears to be the most cost‐effective (883€/success) compared to UGE strategy and to ST strategy (respectively 1628€ and 990€/success). For the endpoint "Probability of peptic ulcer", the T&T strategy appears to be the most cost‐effective (421€/peptic ulcer avoided/y) compared to UGE strategy and ST strategy (respectively 728€ and 632€/peptic ulcer avoided/y). For the endpoint "Gastric cancer avoided", the T&T strategy appears to be the most cost‐effective (524€/gastric cancer avoided/y) compared to UGE strategy and "ST" strategy (respectively 716€ and 696€/gastric cancer avoided/y).Conclusions: T&T strategy including the use of UBT is the most cost‐effective medical approach for management of dyspepsia and for the prevention of ulcer and gastric cancer.

Introduction: Over the years, a number of criticisms have been raised about the robustness of the Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY) indicator and its use in cost-utility analyses; however, costs/QALY are still nowadays recommended as reference case by several Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies from some Commonwealth countries, such as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the UK, claiming that no alternatives exist to allocate health care resources. Areas covered: This review presents a selection of robust alternative methodologies that could be used to support HTA decisions more accurately and more fairly than using the QALYs, including for determining the level of patient access and reimbursement coverage to healthcare interventions. Expert commentary: Because of the scientific complexity of the situations raised by existing and innovative health technologies and interventions, there is currently no single alternative paradigm to propose at this time, but a spectrum of additional analytical techniques which could handle various outcomes including costs and health consequences, and which are not based on a simple multiplicative formula.

Summary: The wide use of cosmetics and their perceived benefits upon well‐being imply objective descriptions of their effects upon the different dimensions contributing to the quality of life (QoL). Such a goal pleas for using relevant and validated scientific instruments with robust measurement methods. This paper discusses the interest of the new validated questionnaire BeautyQoL specifically designed to assess the effect of cosmetic products on physical appearance and QoL. After conducting a review of skin appearance and QoL, three phases of the international codevelopment have been carried out in the following sequence: semi‐directed interviews (Phase 1), acceptability study (Phase 2), and validation study (Phase 3). Data collection and validation process have been carried out in 16 languages. This review confirms that QoL instruments developed in dermatology are not suitable to assess cosmetic products, mainly because of their lack of sensitivity. General acceptability of BeautyQol was very good. Forty‐two questions have been structured in five dimensions that explained 76.7% of the total variance: Social Life, Self‐confidence, Mood, Vitality, and Attractiveness. Cronbach's alpha coefficients are between 0.932 and 0.978, confirming the good internal consistency of the results. The BeautyQol questionnaire is the first international instrument specific to cosmetic products and physical appearance that has been validated in 16 languages and could be used in a number of clinical trials and descriptive studies to demonstrate the added value of these products on the QoL.

The objective of this study is to develop a cost-effectiveness model comparing drug eluting stents (DES) vs bare metal stent (BMS) in patients suffering of stable coronary artery disease. Using a 2-years time horizon, two simulation models have been developed: BMS first line strategy and DES first line strategy. Direct medical costs were estimated considering ambulatory and hospital costs. The effectiveness endpoint was defined as treatment success, which is the absence of major adverse cardiac events. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were carried out using 10000 Monte-Carlo simulations. DES appeared slightly more efficacious over 2 years (60% of success) when compared to BMS (58% of success). Total costs over 2 years were estimated at 9303 € for the DES and at 8926 € for bare metal stent. Hence, corresponding mean cost-effectiveness ratios showed slightly lower costs (P < 0.05) per success for the BMS strategy (15520 €/success), as compared to the DES strategy (15588 €/success). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is 18850 € for one additional percent of success. The sequential strategy including BMS as the first option appears to be slightly less efficacious but more cost-effective compared to the strategy including DES as first option. Future modelling approaches should confirm these results as further comparative data in stable coronary artery disease and long-term evidence become available.