Resumo O objetivo foi identificar o arcabouço regulatório e as orientações federais que sustentam o processo de implementação de tecnologias em saúde no Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), por meio da análise de documentos e legislações relacionados à Política Nacional de Gestão de Tecnologias de Saúde, publicados entre 2009 e 2021. Foi realizada busca e seleção dos documentos e posterior extração de dados, agrupados por três categorias: normativas estruturantes, recomendações na avaliação de tecnologias e recomendações nas diretrizes clínicas. Em 38,8% das normativas, foram identificadas citações à implementação relacionadas principalmente às diretrizes clínicas do SUS, mas nenhum documento dedicado a orientar as ações de implementação. As recomendações relacionadas às implementações foram identificadas em 27,1% dos relatórios e em 66,1% das diretrizes, mas sem padronização e, de modo geral, pouco detalhadas, com foco em recursos e ações necessárias para a disponibilização da tecnologia, ao invés de métodos e intervenções para implementação. Os resultados confirmam a existência de uma lacuna de diretrizes formais para guiar o processo de implementação no Brasil, o que se constitui em oportunidade para o desenvolvimento de modelos alinhados à realidade do SUS.

Abstract This study aimed to identify the regulatory framework and federal guidelines that support the process of implementing health technologies in the Unified Health System (SUS) through analysis of documents and legislation related to the National Health Technology Management Policy, published between 2009 and 2021. The search and selection of documents and subsequent data extraction were carried out. The documents were grouped into three categories: structural regulatory documents, recommendations on evaluation of technologies, and recommendations on clinical guidelines. In 38.8% of the regulatory documents, citations to implementation related mainly to SUS clinical guidelines were identified; however, no document dedicated to guiding implementation actions was identified. Recommendations related to implementations were identified in 27.1% of the reports and 66.1% of the guidelines, although without standardization and, in general, in little detail, focusing on resources and actions needed for making technology available rather than on methods and interventions for its implementation. The results evidence a gap in formal guidelines to guide the implementation process in Brazil, representing an opportunity for the development of models aligned with the reality of the SUS.

Resumen: El objetivo de este estudio fue estimar el coste-efectividad de cuatro terapéuticas disponibles para la leishmaniasis mucosa en Brasil: miltefosina, antimoniato de meglumina, asociado con y sin pentoxifilina, y anfotericina B liposomal. La perspectiva adoptada fue la del Sistema Único de Salud brasileño (SUS). El resultado de interés fue el “paciente curado”, que se analizó mediante un modelo de árbol de decisión. Las estimaciones de costes directos y efectividad se obtuvieron de la literatura científica. El antimoniato de meglumina aislado fue la estrategia de comparación de referencia; el anfotericina B liposomal tuvo una razón coste-efectividad incremental (RCEI) de USD 7.409,13 por paciente curado, y la combinación de antimoniato de meglumina con pentoxifilina tuvo una RCEI de USD 85,13. Predominó la miltefosina, con un coste más elevado y una eficacia similar en comparación con la de antimoniato de meglumina. Los análisis de sensibilidad que variaron el coste en ±25% no alteraron los resultados. Sin embargo, cuando el coste de la miltefosina se estimó en menos de USD 171,23, esta estrategia resultó dominante sobre la antimoniato de meglumina aislada. Los resultados confirman que el tratamiento con anfotericina B liposomal sigue siendo la opción con el RCEI más elevado entre las terapéuticas evaluadas. A su vez, la miltefosina puede ser coste-efectiva en función de la variación del precio de compra, lo que merece atención al ser la única opción oral disponible. La falta de consideración de otros aspectos impide el uso inmediato de estos resultados para subvencionar la toma de decisiones, pero también apunta a la necesidad de negociar los precios de los fármacos disponibles para leishmaniasis mucosa y de fomentar la transferencia de tecnología u otras acciones dirigidas a ampliar el papel del sector industrial nacional.

Abstract: This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of four therapeutic approaches available for mucosal leishmaniasis in Brazil: miltefosine, meglumine antimoniate, combined with and without pentoxifylline, and liposomal amphotericin B. The perspective adopted was that of the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS). The outcome of interest was “cured patient”, which was analyzed using a decision tree model. Estimates of direct costs and effectiveness were obtained from the scientific literature. Meglumine antimoniate alone was the base comparator strategy; liposomal amphotericin B showed an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of USD 7,409.13 per cured patient, and the combination of meglumine antimoniate with pentoxifylline presented an ICER of USD 85.13. Miltefosine was absolutely dominated, with higher cost and similar effectiveness when compared to meglumine antimoniate. Sensitivity analyses, varying the cost by ±25%, did not change the results. However, when the cost of miltefosine was estimated at less than USD 171.23, this strategy was dominant over meglumine antimoniate alone. The results confirm that treatment with liposomal amphotericin B remains the option with the highest ICER among the approaches analyzed. Miltefosine may be cost-effective based on the variation in the acquisition price, which deserves attention because it is the only available oral option. The non-accounting of other aspects prevent the use of these results immediately to support decision-making, but they point out the need to negotiate the prices of drugs available for mucosal leishmaniasis and indicates the need of encouraging technology transfer or other actions aimed at expanding the performance of the Brazilian national industrial complex.

Resumo: O objetivo deste estudo foi estimar o custo-efetividade de quatro abordagens terapêuticas disponíveis para leishmaniose mucosa no Brasil: miltefosina, antimoniato de meglumina, com e sem associação à pentoxifilina e anfotericina B lipossomal. A perspectiva adotada foi a do Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS). O desfecho de interesse foi “paciente curado”, que foi analisado por meio de um modelo de árvore de decisão. Estimativas de custos diretos e efetividade foram obtidas da literatura científica. O antimoniato de meglumina isolado foi a estratégia de comparação de base; a anfotericina B lipossomal apresentou razão de custo-efetividade incremental (RCEI) de USD 7.409,13 por paciente curado, e a combinação de antimoniato de meglumina com pentoxifilina apresentou RCEI de USD 85,13. A miltefosina foi dominada, com maior custo e efetividade semelhante quando comparada àquelas do antimoniato de meglumina. As análises de sensibilidade, variando o custo em ±25%, não alteraram os resultados. No entanto, quando o custo da miltefosina foi estimado em menos de USD 171,23, essa estratégia foi dominante sobre o antimoniato de meglumina isolado. Os resultados confirmam que o tratamento com anfotericina B lipossomal continua sendo a opção com maior RCEI entre as abordagens analisadas. Por sua vez, a miltefosina pode ser custo-efetiva com base na variação do preço de aquisição, o que merece atenção por ser a única opção oral disponível. A não consideração de outros aspectos impede o uso imediato desses resultados para subsidiar a tomada de decisão, mas apontam a necessidade de negociação dos preços dos medicamentos disponíveis para a leishmaniose mucosa e indicam a necessidade de incentivar a transferência de tecnologia ou outras ações que visem ampliar a atuação do complexo industrial nacional.

Abstract This study aimed to identify the regulatory framework and federal guidelines that support the process of implementing health technologies in the Unified Health System (SUS) through analysis of documents and legislation related to the National Health Technology Management Policy, published between 2009 and 2021. The search and selection of documents and subsequent data extraction were carried out. The documents were grouped into three categories: structural regulatory documents, recommendations on evaluation of technologies, and recommendations on clinical guidelines. In 38.8% of the regulatory documents, citations to implementation related mainly to SUS clinical guidelines were identified; however, no document dedicated to guiding implementation actions was identified. Recommendations related to implementations were identified in 27.1% of the reports and 66.1% of the guidelines, although without standardization and, in general, in little detail, focusing on resources and actions needed for making technology available rather than on methods and interventions for its implementation. The results evidence a gap in formal guidelines to guide the implementation process in Brazil, representing an opportunity for the development of models aligned with the reality of the SUS.

Resumo O objetivo foi identificar o arcabouço regulatório e as orientações federais que sustentam o processo de implementação de tecnologias em saúde no Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), por meio da análise de documentos e legislações relacionados à Política Nacional de Gestão de Tecnologias de Saúde, publicados entre 2009 e 2021. Foi realizada busca e seleção dos documentos e posterior extração de dados, agrupados por três categorias: normativas estruturantes, recomendações na avaliação de tecnologias e recomendações nas diretrizes clínicas. Em 38,8% das normativas, foram identificadas citações à implementação relacionadas principalmente às diretrizes clínicas do SUS, mas nenhum documento dedicado a orientar as ações de implementação. As recomendações relacionadas às implementações foram identificadas em 27,1% dos relatórios e em 66,1% das diretrizes, mas sem padronização e, de modo geral, pouco detalhadas, com foco em recursos e ações necessárias para a disponibilização da tecnologia, ao invés de métodos e intervenções para implementação. Os resultados confirmam a existência de uma lacuna de diretrizes formais para guiar o processo de implementação no Brasil, o que se constitui em oportunidade para o desenvolvimento de modelos alinhados à realidade do SUS.

Resumo O objetivo foi identificar o arcabouço regulatório e as orientações federais que sustentam o processo de implementação de tecnologias em saúde no Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), por meio da análise de documentos e legislações relacionados à Política Nacional de Gestão de Tecnologias de Saúde, publicados entre 2009 e 2021. Foi realizada busca e seleção dos documentos e posterior extração de dados, agrupados por três categorias: normativas estruturantes, recomendações na avaliação de tecnologias e recomendações nas diretrizes clínicas. Em 38,8% das normativas, foram identificadas citações à implementação relacionadas principalmente às diretrizes clínicas do SUS, mas nenhum documento dedicado a orientar as ações de implementação. As recomendações relacionadas às implementações foram identificadas em 27,1% dos relatórios e em 66,1% das diretrizes, mas sem padronização e, de modo geral, pouco detalhadas, com foco em recursos e ações necessárias para a disponibilização da tecnologia, ao invés de métodos e intervenções para implementação. Os resultados confirmam a existência de uma lacuna de diretrizes formais para guiar o processo de implementação no Brasil, o que se constitui em oportunidade para o desenvolvimento de modelos alinhados à realidade do SUS. SUS , (SUS) 200 2021 dados categorias estruturantes 388 38 8 38,8 271 27 1 27,1 661 66 66,1 geral detalhadas tecnologia Brasil (SUS 20 202 3 38, 2 27, 6 66,

Abstract This study aimed to identify the regulatory framework and federal guidelines that support the process of implementing health technologies in the Unified Health System (SUS) through analysis of documents and legislation related to the National Health Technology Management Policy, published between 2009 and 2021. The search and selection of documents and subsequent data extraction were carried out. The documents were grouped into three categories: structural regulatory documents, recommendations on evaluation of technologies, and recommendations on clinical guidelines. In 38.8% of the regulatory documents, citations to implementation related mainly to SUS clinical guidelines were identified; however, no document dedicated to guiding implementation actions was identified. Recommendations related to implementations were identified in 27.1% of the reports and 66.1% of the guidelines, although without standardization and, in general, in little detail, focusing on resources and actions needed for making technology available rather than on methods and interventions for its implementation. The results evidence a gap in formal guidelines to guide the implementation process in Brazil, representing an opportunity for the development of models aligned with the reality of the SUS. (SUS Policy 200 2021 out categories 388 38 8 38.8 however 271 27 1 27.1 661 66 66.1 general detail Brazil 20 202 3 38. 2 27. 6 66.

Resumo: O objetivo deste estudo foi estimar o custo-efetividade de quatro abordagens terapêuticas disponíveis para leishmaniose mucosa no Brasil: miltefosina, antimoniato de meglumina, com e sem associação à pentoxifilina e anfotericina B lipossomal. A perspectiva adotada foi a do Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS). O desfecho de interesse foi “paciente curado”, que foi analisado por meio de um modelo de árvore de decisão. Estimativas de custos diretos e efetividade foram obtidas da literatura científica. O antimoniato de meglumina isolado foi a estratégia de comparação de base; a anfotericina B lipossomal apresentou razão de custo-efetividade incremental (RCEI) de USD 7.409,13 por paciente curado, e a combinação de antimoniato de meglumina com pentoxifilina apresentou RCEI de USD 85,13. A miltefosina foi dominada, com maior custo e efetividade semelhante quando comparada àquelas do antimoniato de meglumina. As análises de sensibilidade, variando o custo em ±25%, não alteraram os resultados. No entanto, quando o custo da miltefosina foi estimado em menos de USD 171,23, essa estratégia foi dominante sobre o antimoniato de meglumina isolado. Os resultados confirmam que o tratamento com anfotericina B lipossomal continua sendo a opção com maior RCEI entre as abordagens analisadas. Por sua vez, a miltefosina pode ser custo-efetiva com base na variação do preço de aquisição, o que merece atenção por ser a única opção oral disponível. A não consideração de outros aspectos impede o uso imediato desses resultados para subsidiar a tomada de decisão, mas apontam a necessidade de negociação dos preços dos medicamentos disponíveis para a leishmaniose mucosa e indicam a necessidade de incentivar a transferência de tecnologia ou outras ações que visem ampliar a atuação do complexo industrial nacional. Resumo custoefetividade Brasil SUS. SUS . (SUS) curado , curado” decisão científica (RCEI 740913 7 409 13 7.409,1 8513 85 85,13 dominada sensibilidade 25 ±25% entanto 17123 171 23 171,23 analisadas vez custoefetiva efetiva aquisição disponível nacional (SUS 74091 40 1 7.409, 851 8 85,1 2 ±25 1712 17 171,2 7409 4 7.409 85, ±2 171, 740 7.40 ± 74 7.4 7.

Abstract: This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of four therapeutic approaches available for mucosal leishmaniasis in Brazil: miltefosine, meglumine antimoniate, combined with and without pentoxifylline, and liposomal amphotericin B. The perspective adopted was that of the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS). The outcome of interest was “cured patient”, which was analyzed using a decision tree model. Estimates of direct costs and effectiveness were obtained from the scientific literature. Meglumine antimoniate alone was the base comparator strategy; liposomal amphotericin B showed an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of USD 7,409.13 per cured patient, and the combination of meglumine antimoniate with pentoxifylline presented an ICER of USD 85.13. Miltefosine was absolutely dominated, with higher cost and similar effectiveness when compared to meglumine antimoniate. Sensitivity analyses, varying the cost by ±25%, did not change the results. However, when the cost of miltefosine was estimated at less than USD 171.23, this strategy was dominant over meglumine antimoniate alone. The results confirm that treatment with liposomal amphotericin B remains the option with the highest ICER among the approaches analyzed. Miltefosine may be cost-effective based on the variation in the acquisition price, which deserves attention because it is the only available oral option. The non-accounting of other aspects prevent the use of these results immediately to support decision-making, but they point out the need to negotiate the prices of drugs available for mucosal leishmaniasis and indicates the need of encouraging technology transfer or other actions aimed at expanding the performance of the Brazilian national industrial complex. Abstract costeffectiveness Brazil SUS. SUS . (SUS) patient , patient” model literature (ICER 740913 7 409 13 7,409.1 8513 85 85.13 dominated analyses 25 ±25% However 17123 171 23 171.23 costeffective effective price nonaccounting non accounting decisionmaking, decisionmaking making, making decision-making complex (SUS 74091 40 1 7,409. 851 8 85.1 2 ±25 1712 17 171.2 7409 4 7,409 85. ±2 171. 740 7,40 ± 74 7,4 7,

Resumen: El objetivo de este estudio fue estimar el coste-efectividad de cuatro terapéuticas disponibles para la leishmaniasis mucosa en Brasil: miltefosina, antimoniato de meglumina, asociado con y sin pentoxifilina, y anfotericina B liposomal. La perspectiva adoptada fue la del Sistema Único de Salud brasileño (SUS). El resultado de interés fue el “paciente curado”, que se analizó mediante un modelo de árbol de decisión. Las estimaciones de costes directos y efectividad se obtuvieron de la literatura científica. El antimoniato de meglumina aislado fue la estrategia de comparación de referencia; el anfotericina B liposomal tuvo una razón coste-efectividad incremental (RCEI) de USD 7.409,13 por paciente curado, y la combinación de antimoniato de meglumina con pentoxifilina tuvo una RCEI de USD 85,13. Predominó la miltefosina, con un coste más elevado y una eficacia similar en comparación con la de antimoniato de meglumina. Los análisis de sensibilidad que variaron el coste en ±25% no alteraron los resultados. Sin embargo, cuando el coste de la miltefosina se estimó en menos de USD 171,23, esta estrategia resultó dominante sobre la antimoniato de meglumina aislada. Los resultados confirman que el tratamiento con anfotericina B liposomal sigue siendo la opción con el RCEI más elevado entre las terapéuticas evaluadas. A su vez, la miltefosina puede ser coste-efectiva en función de la variación del precio de compra, lo que merece atención al ser la única opción oral disponible. La falta de consideración de otros aspectos impide el uso inmediato de estos resultados para subvencionar la toma de decisiones, pero también apunta a la necesidad de negociar los precios de los fármacos disponibles para leishmaniasis mucosa y de fomentar la transferencia de tecnología u otras acciones dirigidas a ampliar el papel del sector industrial nacional. Resumen costeefectividad Brasil SUS. SUS . (SUS) curado , curado” decisión científica referencia (RCEI 740913 7 409 13 7.409,1 8513 85 85,13 25 ±25 embargo 17123 171 23 171,23 aislada evaluadas vez costeefectiva efectiva compra disponible decisiones nacional (SUS 74091 40 1 7.409, 851 8 85,1 2 ±2 1712 17 171,2 7409 4 7.409 85, ± 171, 740 7.40 74 7.4 7.

ABSTRACT Timely and accurate diagnosis is one of the strategies for managing visceral leishmaniasis (VL). Given the specificities of this infection, which affects different vulnerable populations, the local assessment of the accuracy of the available diagnostic test is a requirement for the good use of resources. In Brazil, performance data are required for test registration with the National Regulatory Agency (ANVISA), but there are no minimum requirements established for performance evaluation. Here, we compared the accuracy reported in the manufacturer’s instructions of commercially available VL-diagnostic tests in Brazil, and the accuracies reported in the scientific literature which were obtained after test commercialization. The tests were identified via the electronic database of ANVISA, and their accuracy was obtained from the manufacturer’s instructions. A literature search for test accuracy was performed using two databases. A total of 28 VL diagnostic tests were identified through the ANVISA database. However, only 13 presented performance data in the manufacturer’s instructions, with five immunoenzymatic tests, three indirect immunofluorescence tests, one chemiluminescence test, and four rapid tests. For most tests, the manufacturers did not provide the relevant information, such as sample size, reference standards, and study site. The literature review identified accuracy data for only 61.5% of diagnostic tests registered in Brazil. These observations confirmed that there are significant flaws in the process of registering health technologies and highlighted one of the reasons for the insufficient control of policies, namely, the use of potentially inaccurate and inappropriate diagnostic tools for a given scenario. VL. . (VL) infection populations resources Brazil , (ANVISA) evaluation Here manufacturer s VLdiagnostic commercialization databases 2 However 1 information size standards site 615 61 5 61.5 policies namely scenario (VL (ANVISA 6 61.

ABSTRACT Neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) are those affecting vulnerable people and causing additional social and economic burden. The aim of this study was to carry out a general overview of the health economic assessments involving the diagnosis and treatment of six NTDs: cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL), Chagas disease, cysticercosis, filariasis, schistosomiasis and visceral leishmaniasis (VL). The literature search was based on two of the main medical literature databases (Medline and SciELO) and identified 46 studies. Twenty-six studies (57%) addressed therapeutic strategies, while other 20 (43%) assessed diagnostic or both diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. The studies were published between 1994 and 2021, and 57% of them (26/46) were carried out in four countries. Cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted in 59% (27/46) of the studies. Economic studies of NTDs have timidly increased in recent years. Despite the improvement of analytical methods, completeness and accuracy of information, there are few new technologies applied to NTDs and public health systems. In addition, economic studies for NTDs are concentrated in a few countries. Thus, this review points out the need for investment in research, development and training of human resources dedicated to the economic analysis in health, especially on NTDs, as a strategy to reduce inequalities by optimizing the use of health resources.

ABSTRACT Snake envenoming is a neglected tropical disease that affects more than 2.7 million people worldwide. The treatment is based on the administration of antivenom composed of heterologous immunoglobulins, species-specific therapy involving the possibility of adverse reactions due to activation of the immune system. Considering the scarcity of prospective studies evaluating the safety of snake antivenoms, this study aimed to describe and characterize adverse events after antivenom infusion in an observational, prospective, single-centre investigation conducted in a referral centre in Brazil. A total of 47 victims of snake envenoming were included in the study, who were mostly men (75%), with ages ranging from 2 to 83 years. Twenty-two participants (47%) presented manifestations compatible with infusion-related reactions (IRRs) during or up to two hours after F(ab’)2 heterologous immunoglobulin infusion. The most common clinical manifestation related to the infusion was a diffuse cutaneous rash (82%), followed by respiratory manifestations (46%) and facial swelling (23%). In four cases (9%), IRR were considered serious adverse events (SAE), characterized by haemodynamic instability, airway obstruction or hypoxia. Only one patient developed symptoms compatible with serum sickness. Although almost half of the patients treated with antivenom sera experienced IRRs, the SAE rate was 9%; in all cases, the adverse reaction was reversible by using supportive treatment, and there were no deaths. The results have shown that there is much to improve in the antivenom production process to obtain a more purified and specific product. Even so, a timely antivenom serum administration managed by well-trained health teams is safe and prevents complications after snake-related accidents.

Abstract INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to estimate the direct medical costs of the treatment for mucosal leishmaniasis (ML) using three therapeutic approaches in the Brazilian context. METHODS: We performed this economic assessment from the perspective of the Brazilian public healthcare system. The following therapeutic approaches were evaluated: meglumine antimoniate, liposomal amphotericin B, and miltefosine. Direct medical costs were estimated considering four treatment components: a) drug, b) combined medical products, c) procedures, and d) complementary tests. RESULTS: Treatment with meglumine antimoniate had the lowest average cost per patient (US$ 167.66), followed by miltefosine (US$ 259.92) in the outpatient treatment regimen. The average cost of treatment with liposomal amphotericin B was US$ 715.35 both in inpatient regimen. In all estimates, the drugs accounted for more than 60% of the total cost for each treatment approach. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the marked differences in costs between the therapeutic alternatives for ML. In addition to efficacy rates and costs related to adverse events, our data have the potential to support a complete cost-effectiveness study in the future. Complete analyses comparing costs and benefits for interventions will assist health managers in choosing drugs for ML treatment in Brazil as well as in establishing effective public health policies.

A leishmaniose cutânea (LC) é uma doença associada a populações de baixa renda. Portanto, a inclusão do impacto financeiro sobre os pacientes é muito importante para avaliar a carga dessa doença. Tivemos como objetivo avaliar o impacto econômico da LC em pacientes afetados pela doença e tratados em um centro de referência para LC no Estado de Minas Gerais, Brasil. Foi um estudo transversal com base em análise de entrevistas e prontuários médicos para compilação dos gastos médicos e não médicos diretos relacionados à LC, desde uma perspectiva societal. Foram incluídos cem pacientes; 50% tinham renda mensal per capita de até USD 259,60. O gasto médio na doença foi de USD 187,32, o que representa um impacto mensal médio de 22,5% (USD 133,80). A doença impôs custos médicos diretos, como o pagamento por consultas médicas particulares, exames médicos, material para curativos e co-participação em seguro de saúde. Os custos não médicos diretos estiveram relacionados ao transporte dos pacientes até os centros de saúde, cuidados adicionais, alimentação e contratos com serviços terceirizados para atividades domésticas e laborais. O transporte dos pacientes para as consultas médicas representava a principal parcela dos gastos (USD 4.911,00). Embora o acesso à assistência à saúde seja um direito garantido pelo Sistema Único de Saúde, a LC ainda gera um impacto financeiro substancial para os pacientes. A descentralização dos serviços diagnósticos e terapêuticos para LC e o aumento de sua eficiência são as principais medidas que podem reduzir os gastos com essa doença.

Cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) is a disease associated with low-income populations. Thus, in assessing the burden of this disease, it is important to include its economic impact on individuals. We aimed to evaluate CL economic impact on patients treated at a referral service in the State of Minas Gerais, Brazil. This is a cross-sectional study based on the analysis of interviews and medical records from which we assembled direct medical and non-medical costs related to CL, from a societal perspective. One hundred patients were included; 50% had a monthly per capita income of up to USD 259.60 and spent on average USD 187.32 with the disease, representing an average monthly impact of 22.5% (USD 133.80). The disease imposed direct medical costs, such as: private medical appointments, medications, medical exams, dressing material, and co-participation in health insurances. Direct non-medical costs were mainly related to patients’ transportation to health centers (USD 4,911.00), but also included medically-necessary care, food, and domestic and business outsourcing services. Although the Brazilian public health system guarantees access to health care, CL still represents a substantial economic impact for patients. The main action to reduce the expenses with this disease is decentralizing services for CL diagnosis and therapeutic approach, as well as increasing their efficiency.

La leishmaniosis cutánea (LC) es una enfermedad asociada a poblaciones con ingresos bajos. Por ello, incluir el impacto financiero para las personas es muy importante a la hora de evaluar la carga de esta enfermedad. Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar el impacto económico de la LC, de pacientes afectados por esta enfermedad, que fueron tratados por un servicio de referencia para el tratamiento de la LC en el Estado de Minas Gerais, Brasil. Este estudio transversal basado en entrevistas y análisis de registros médicos para la recopilación de gastos médicos y no-médicos directos, relacionados con la LC desde una a perspectiva social. Se incluyeron a cien pacientes; el 50% contaba con ingresos mensuales per cápita de hasta USD 259,60 y gastaban un promedio de USD 187,32 en la enfermedad, representando un impacto promedio mensual de 22,5% (USD 133,80). La enfermedad supuso costes médicos directos, como el pago de citas médicas privadas, medicamentos, exámenes médicos, material para vendajes, y coparticipación en seguros médicos. Los costes directos no-médicos estaban relacionados con el transporte de los pacientes a los centros de salud, el cuidado necesario, comida, y contratos con servicios externalizados para actividades domésticas y laborales. El transporte de los pacientes para citas médicas representó la principal razón para los gastos (USD 4.911,00). A pesar de que el acceso a los cuidados de salud es un derecho garantizado por el sistema de salud público brasileño, la LC todavía supone un impacto financiero importante para los pacientes. La descentralización de los servicios para el diagnóstico de LC, la aproximación terapéutica, y el incremento de su eficiencia, son las acciones con principal potencial para reducir los gastos financieros de esta enfermedad.

A leishmaniose cutânea (LC) é uma doença associada a populações de baixa renda. Portanto, a inclusão do impacto financeiro sobre os pacientes é muito importante para avaliar a carga dessa doença. Tivemos como objetivo avaliar o impacto econômico da LC em pacientes afetados pela doença e tratados em um centro de referência para LC no Estado de Minas Gerais, Brasil. Foi um estudo transversal com base em análise de entrevistas e prontuários médicos para compilação dos gastos médicos e não médicos diretos relacionados à LC, desde uma perspectiva societal. Foram incluídos cem pacientes; 50% tinham renda mensal per capita de até USD 259,60. O gasto médio na doença foi de USD 187,32, o que representa um impacto mensal médio de 22,5% (USD 133,80). A doença impôs custos médicos diretos, como o pagamento por consultas médicas particulares, exames médicos, material para curativos e co-participação em seguro de saúde. Os custos não médicos diretos estiveram relacionados ao transporte dos pacientes até os centros de saúde, cuidados adicionais, alimentação e contratos com serviços terceirizados para atividades domésticas e laborais. O transporte dos pacientes para as consultas médicas representava a principal parcela dos gastos (USD 4.911,00). Embora o acesso à assistência à saúde seja um direito garantido pelo Sistema Único de Saúde, a LC ainda gera um impacto financeiro substancial para os pacientes. A descentralização dos serviços diagnósticos e terapêuticos para LC e o aumento de sua eficiência são as principais medidas que podem reduzir os gastos com essa doença.

Cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) is a disease associated with low-income populations. Thus, in assessing the burden of this disease, it is important to include its economic impact on individuals. We aimed to evaluate CL economic impact on patients treated at a referral service in the State of Minas Gerais, Brazil. This is a cross-sectional study based on the analysis of interviews and medical records from which we assembled direct medical and non-medical costs related to CL, from a societal perspective. One hundred patients were included; 50% had a monthly per capita income of up to USD 259.60 and spent on average USD 187.32 with the disease, representing an average monthly impact of 22.5% (USD 133.80). The disease imposed direct medical costs, such as: private medical appointments, medications, medical exams, dressing material, and co-participation in health insurances. Direct non-medical costs were mainly related to patients’ transportation to health centers (USD 4,911.00), but also included medically-necessary care, food, and domestic and business outsourcing services. Although the Brazilian public health system guarantees access to health care, CL still represents a substantial economic impact for patients. The main action to reduce the expenses with this disease is decentralizing services for CL diagnosis and therapeutic approach, as well as increasing their efficiency.

La leishmaniosis cutánea (LC) es una enfermedad asociada a poblaciones con ingresos bajos. Por ello, incluir el impacto financiero para las personas es muy importante a la hora de evaluar la carga de esta enfermedad. Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar el impacto económico de la LC, de pacientes afectados por esta enfermedad, que fueron tratados por un servicio de referencia para el tratamiento de la LC en el Estado de Minas Gerais, Brasil. Este estudio transversal basado en entrevistas y análisis de registros médicos para la recopilación de gastos médicos y no-médicos directos, relacionados con la LC desde una a perspectiva social. Se incluyeron a cien pacientes; el 50% contaba con ingresos mensuales per cápita de hasta USD 259,60 y gastaban un promedio de USD 187,32 en la enfermedad, representando un impacto promedio mensual de 22,5% (USD 133,80). La enfermedad supuso costes médicos directos, como el pago de citas médicas privadas, medicamentos, exámenes médicos, material para vendajes, y coparticipación en seguros médicos. Los costes directos no-médicos estaban relacionados con el transporte de los pacientes a los centros de salud, el cuidado necesario, comida, y contratos con servicios externalizados para actividades domésticas y laborales. El transporte de los pacientes para citas médicas representó la principal razón para los gastos (USD 4.911,00). A pesar de que el acceso a los cuidados de salud es un derecho garantizado por el sistema de salud público brasileño, la LC todavía supone un impacto financiero importante para los pacientes. La descentralización de los servicios para el diagnóstico de LC, la aproximación terapéutica, y el incremento de su eficiencia, son las acciones con principal potencial para reducir los gastos financieros de esta enfermedad.

Abstract INTRODUCTION: The use of insecticide-impregnated dog collars is a potentially useful tool for the control of visceral leishmaniasis. The objective of the present study was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of a program based on insecticide-impregnated collars compared to traditional visceral leishmaniasis control strategies used in Brazil. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the perspective of the Unified Health System, using data from the Visceral Leishmaniasis Control Program implemented in the municipality of Montes Claros, Minas Gerais. The direct costs of the three control strategies, which were 1) canine infection screening + sacrifice, 2) residual chemical control of the vector, and 3) insecticide-impregnated dog collars (Scalibor®), were evaluated over the two-year study period. RESULTS: The total cost of the program in the area subjected to the traditional control strategies (strategies 1 and 2; control area) was R$ 1,551,699.80, and in the area subjected to all three control strategies (intervention area), it was R$ 1,898,190.16. The collar program was considered highly cost-effective at preventing canine visceral leishmaniasis (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of approximately R$ 578 per avoided dog sacrifice). CONCLUSIONS: These results provide support for the decision by the Brazilian Ministry of Health in 2019 to provide insecticide-impregnated collars for the control of canine visceral leishmaniasis in a pilot project.

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is fatal if not diagnosed and treated. This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic-therapeutic alternatives for VL in Brazil. METHODS: A decision model estimated the life expectancy and costs of six diagnostic-therapeutic strategies. RESULTS: IT LEISH + liposomal amphotericin B emerged the best option, presenting lower costs and higher effectiveness. DAT-LPC + liposomal amphotericin B showed an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$ 326.31 per life year. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate the feasibility of incorporating DAT and designating liposomal amphotericin B as the first-line drug for VL in Brazil.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Pentavalent antimonials (Sbv) are the most commonly used drugs for the treatment of mucosal leishmaniasis (ML), despite their high toxicity and only moderate efficacy. The aim of this study was to report therapeutic responses with different available options for ML. METHODS This study was based on a review of clinical records of 35 patients (24 men and 11 women) treated between 2009 and 2015. RESULTS The median age of patients was 63 years, and the median duration of the disease was 24 months. Seventeen patients received Sbv, while nine patients were treated with liposomal amphotericin B (AmB), and another nine patients were treated with fluconazole. Patients treated with AmB received a total median accumulated dose of 2550mg. The mean duration of azole use was 120 days, and the daily dose ranged from 450 to 900mg. At the three-month follow-up visit, the cure rate was 35%, 67%, and 22% for Sbv, AmB, and azole groups, respectively. At the six-month follow-up visit, the cure rates for Sbv, AmB, and azole groups were 71%, 78%, and 33%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS There is a scarcity of effective ML treatment alternatives, and based on our observations, fluconazole is not a valid treatment option.

BACKGROUND Despite its recognised toxicity, antimonial therapy continues to be the first-line drug for cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) treatment. Intralesional administration of meglumine antimoniate (MA) represents an alternative that could reduce the systemic absorption of the drug and its side effects. OBJECTIVES This study aims to validate the standard operational procedure (SOP) for the intralesional infiltration of MA for CL therapy as the first step before the assessment of efficacy and safety related to the procedure. METHODS The SOP was created based on 21 trials retrieved from the literature, direct monitoring of the procedure and consultation with experts. This script was submitted to a formal computer-aided inspection to identify readability, clarity, omission, redundancy and unnecessary information (content validation). For criterion and construct validations, the influence of critical condition changes (compliance with the instructions and professional experience) on outcome conformity (saturation status achievement), tolerability (pain referred) and safety (bleeding) were assessed. FINDINGS The median procedure length was 12 minutes and in 72% of them, patients classified the pain as mild. The bleeding was also classified as mild in 96.6% of the procedures. Full compliance with the SOP was observed in 66% of infiltrations. Despite this, in 100% of the inspected procedures, lesion saturation was observed at the end of infiltration, which means that it tolerates some degree of modification in its execution (robustness) without prejudice to the result. CONCLUSIONS The procedure is reproducible and can be used by professionals without previous training with high success and safety rates.