1
|
Jermann N, Krusche B, Metag V, Afzal F, Badea M, Beck R, Bielefeldt P, Bieling J, Biroth M, Blanke E, Borisov N, Bornstein M, Brinkmann KT, Ciupka S, Crede V, Dolzhikov A, Drexler P, Dutz H, Elsner D, Fedorov A, Frommberger F, Gardner S, Ghosal D, Goertz S, Gorodnov I, Grüner M, Hammann C, Hartmann J, Hillert W, Hoffmeister P, Honisch C, Jude TC, Kalischewski F, Ketzer B, Klassen P, Klein F, Klempt E, Knaust J, Kolanus N, Kreit J, Krönert P, Lang M, Lazarev AB, Livingston K, Lutterer S, Mahlberg P, Meier C, Meyer W, Mitlasoczki B, Müllers J, Nanova M, Neganov A, Nikonov K, Noël JF, Ostrick M, Ottnad J, Otto B, Penman G, Poller T, Proft D, Reicherz G, Reinartz N, Richter L, Runkel S, Salisbury B, Sarantsev AV, Schaab D, Schmidt C, Schmieden H, Schultes J, Seifen T, Spieker K, Stausberg N, Steinacher M, Taubert F, Thiel A, Thoma U, Thomas A, Urban M, Urff G, Usov Y, van Pee H, Wang YC, Wendel C, Wiedner U, Wunderlich Y. Measurement of polarization observables T, P, and H in π0 and η photoproduction off quasi-free nucleons. Eur Phys J A Hadron Nucl 2023; 59:232. [PMID: 37860634 PMCID: PMC10582157 DOI: 10.1140/epja/s10050-023-01134-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2023] [Accepted: 09/21/2023] [Indexed: 10/21/2023]
Abstract
The target asymmetry T, recoil asymmetry P, and beam-target double polarization observable H were determined in exclusive π 0 and η photoproduction off quasi-free protons and, for the first time, off quasi-free neutrons. The experiment was performed at the electron stretcher accelerator ELSA in Bonn, Germany, with the Crystal Barrel/TAPS detector setup, using a linearly polarized photon beam and a transversely polarized deuterated butanol target. Effects from the Fermi motion of the nucleons within deuterium were removed by a full kinematic reconstruction of the final state invariant mass. A comparison of the data obtained on the proton and on the neutron provides new insight into the isospin structure of the electromagnetic excitation of the nucleon. Earlier measurements of polarization observables in the γ p → π 0 p and γ p → η p reactions are confirmed. The data obtained on the neutron are of particular relevance for clarifying the origin of the narrow structure in the η n system at W = 1.68 GeV . A comparison with recent partial wave analyses favors the interpretation of this structure as arising from interference of the S 11 ( 1535 ) and S 11 ( 1650 ) resonances within the S 11 -partial wave.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N. Jermann
- Department of Physics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - B. Krusche
- Department of Physics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - V. Metag
- II. Physikalisches Institut, University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany
| | - F. Afzal
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - M. Badea
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - R. Beck
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - P. Bielefeldt
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - J. Bieling
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - M. Biroth
- Institut für Kernphysik, University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - E. Blanke
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - N. Borisov
- Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
| | - M. Bornstein
- Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - K.-T. Brinkmann
- II. Physikalisches Institut, University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany
| | - S. Ciupka
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - V. Crede
- Department of Physics, Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA
| | - A. Dolzhikov
- Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
| | - P. Drexler
- Institut für Kernphysik, University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - H. Dutz
- Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - D. Elsner
- Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - A. Fedorov
- Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
| | - F. Frommberger
- Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - S. Gardner
- SUPA School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - D. Ghosal
- Department of Physics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
- Present Address: resent address: University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - S. Goertz
- Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - I. Gorodnov
- Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
| | - M. Grüner
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - C. Hammann
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - J. Hartmann
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - W. Hillert
- Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
- Present Address: resent address: University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
| | - P. Hoffmeister
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - C. Honisch
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - T. C. Jude
- Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - F. Kalischewski
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - B. Ketzer
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - P. Klassen
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - F. Klein
- Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - E. Klempt
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - J. Knaust
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - N. Kolanus
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - J. Kreit
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - P. Krönert
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - M. Lang
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | | | - K. Livingston
- SUPA School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - S. Lutterer
- Department of Physics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
- Present Address: resent address: Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
| | - P. Mahlberg
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - C. Meier
- Department of Physics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - W. Meyer
- Institut für Experimentalphysik I, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
| | - B. Mitlasoczki
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - J. Müllers
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - M. Nanova
- II. Physikalisches Institut, University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany
| | - A. Neganov
- Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
| | - K. Nikonov
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - J. F. Noël
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - M. Ostrick
- Institut für Kernphysik, University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - J. Ottnad
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - B. Otto
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - G. Penman
- SUPA School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - T. Poller
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - D. Proft
- Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - G. Reicherz
- Institut für Experimentalphysik I, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
| | - N. Reinartz
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - L. Richter
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - S. Runkel
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
- Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - B. Salisbury
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - A. V. Sarantsev
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - D. Schaab
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - C. Schmidt
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - H. Schmieden
- Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - J. Schultes
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - T. Seifen
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - K. Spieker
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - N. Stausberg
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - M. Steinacher
- Department of Physics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - F. Taubert
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - A. Thiel
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - U. Thoma
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - A. Thomas
- Institut für Kernphysik, University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - M. Urban
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - G. Urff
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - Y. Usov
- Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
| | - H. van Pee
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - Y. C. Wang
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - C. Wendel
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - U. Wiedner
- Institut für Experimentalphysik I, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
| | - Y. Wunderlich
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - CBELSA/TAPS Collaboration
- Department of Physics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
- Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen-und Kernphysik, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
- II. Physikalisches Institut, University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany
- Institut für Kernphysik, University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
- Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
- Department of Physics, Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA
- Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
- SUPA School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
- Institut für Experimentalphysik I, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
- Present Address: resent address: University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
- Present Address: resent address: University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
- Present Address: resent address: Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Golani M, Frenkel O, Bornstein M, Shulhani R, Abbo S, Shtienberg D. Prevalence, Development, and Significance of Ascochyta Blight Caused by Peyronellaea pinodes in Pisum elatius Populations Growing in Natural Ecosystems. Phytopathology 2016; 106:833-41. [PMID: 27050576 DOI: 10.1094/phyto-02-16-0064-r] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
Abstract
Wild Pisum populations prevail in Israel in regions with diverse climatic conditions. A comprehensive survey was conducted in the winters of 2007-08 and 2008-09 at two sites in northern Israel, aiming to (i) document the density of Pisum elatius plants in natural ecosystems and elucidate factors related to their initial infection by Ascochyta blight and (ii) determine the factors governing disease development over time on individual plants. The surveyors identified P. elatius plants growing in designated quadrats, inspected each plant visually, and recorded the incidence and severity of its Ascochyta blight symptoms. Ascochyta blight, caused by Peyronellaea pinodes, was ubiquitous in Pisum elatius populations at both survey sites in both seasons. However, the total leaf area exhibiting disease symptoms of individual plants was very low, and stem and pod infections were rarely observed. Based on analyses of the survey data, it was suggested that, in natural ecosystems, the teleomorph stage of Peyronellaea pinodes serves as the main source of the primary and the secondary inoculum of the disease. In addition, it was found that infected leaves dropped off soon after infection, thereby precluding development of stem lesions. The plants continued growing and did not die; thus, they overcame the disease and could be considered "cured". This phenomenon was examined and confirmed in artificially inoculated, potted-plant experiments. It would be worthwhile to exploit the potential of this unique resistance mechanism as a tool for Ascochyta blight management in pea breeding.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Golani
- First, second, third, fourth, and sixth authors: Department of Plant Pathology, Volcani Center, Agricultural Research Organization, Bet-Dagan 50250, Israel; and first and fifth authors: The Robert H Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, The Levi Eshkol School of Agriculture, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot 7610001, Israel
| | - O Frenkel
- First, second, third, fourth, and sixth authors: Department of Plant Pathology, Volcani Center, Agricultural Research Organization, Bet-Dagan 50250, Israel; and first and fifth authors: The Robert H Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, The Levi Eshkol School of Agriculture, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot 7610001, Israel
| | - M Bornstein
- First, second, third, fourth, and sixth authors: Department of Plant Pathology, Volcani Center, Agricultural Research Organization, Bet-Dagan 50250, Israel; and first and fifth authors: The Robert H Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, The Levi Eshkol School of Agriculture, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot 7610001, Israel
| | - R Shulhani
- First, second, third, fourth, and sixth authors: Department of Plant Pathology, Volcani Center, Agricultural Research Organization, Bet-Dagan 50250, Israel; and first and fifth authors: The Robert H Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, The Levi Eshkol School of Agriculture, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot 7610001, Israel
| | - S Abbo
- First, second, third, fourth, and sixth authors: Department of Plant Pathology, Volcani Center, Agricultural Research Organization, Bet-Dagan 50250, Israel; and first and fifth authors: The Robert H Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, The Levi Eshkol School of Agriculture, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot 7610001, Israel
| | - D Shtienberg
- First, second, third, fourth, and sixth authors: Department of Plant Pathology, Volcani Center, Agricultural Research Organization, Bet-Dagan 50250, Israel; and first and fifth authors: The Robert H Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, The Levi Eshkol School of Agriculture, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot 7610001, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Chandra K, Blackhouse G, McCurdy BR, Bornstein M, Campbell K, Costa V, Franek J, Kaulback K, Levin L, Sehatzadeh S, Sikich N, Thabane M, Goeree R. Cost-effectiveness of interventions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) using an Ontario policy model. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser 2012; 12:1-61. [PMID: 23074422 PMCID: PMC3384363] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/01/2023]
Abstract
UNLABELLED In July 2010, the Medical Advisory Secretariat (MAS) began work on a Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) evidentiary framework, an evidence-based review of the literature surrounding treatment strategies for patients with COPD. This project emerged from a request by the Health System Strategy Division of the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care that MAS provide them with an evidentiary platform on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of COPD interventions. After an initial review of health technology assessments and systematic reviews of COPD literature, and consultation with experts, MAS identified the following topics for analysis: vaccinations (influenza and pneumococcal), smoking cessation, multidisciplinary care, pulmonary rehabilitation, long-term oxygen therapy, noninvasive positive pressure ventilation for acute and chronic respiratory failure, hospital-at-home for acute exacerbations of COPD, and telehealth (including telemonitoring and telephone support). Evidence-based analyses were prepared for each of these topics. For each technology, an economic analysis was also completed where appropriate. In addition, a review of the qualitative literature on patient, caregiver, and provider perspectives on living and dying with COPD was conducted, as were reviews of the qualitative literature on each of the technologies included in these analyses. The Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Mega-Analysis series is made up of the following reports, which can be publicly accessed at the MAS website at: http://www.hqontario.ca/en/mas/mas_ohtas_mn.html. Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Evidentiary Framework. Influenza and Pneumococcal Vaccinations for Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): An Evidence-Based Analysis. Smoking Cessation for Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): An Evidence-Based Analysis. Community-Based Multidisciplinary Care for Patients With Stable Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): An Evidence-Based Analysis. Pulmonary Rehabilitation for Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): An Evidence-Based Analysis. Long-Term Oxygen Therapy for Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): An Evidence-Based Analysis. Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation for Acute Respiratory Failure Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): An Evidence-Based Analysis. Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation for Chronic Respiratory Failure Patients With Stable Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): An Evidence-Based Analysis. Hospital-at-Home Programs for Patients With Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): An Evidence-Based Analysis. Home Telehealth for Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): An Evidence-Based Analysis. Cost-Effectiveness of Interventions for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Using an Ontario Policy Model. Experiences of Living and Dying With COPD: A Systematic Review and Synthesis of the Qualitative Empirical Literature. For more information on the qualitative review, please contact Mita Giacomini at: http://fhs.mcmaster.ca/ceb/faculty_member_giacomini.htm. For more information on the economic analysis, please visit the PATH website: http://www.path-hta.ca/About-Us/Contact-Us.aspx. The Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) collaborative has produced an associated report on patient preference for mechanical ventilation. For more information, please visit the THETA website: http://theta.utoronto.ca/static/contact. BACKGROUND Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by chronic inflammation throughout the airways, parenchyma, and pulmonary vasculature. The inflammation causes repeated cycles of injury and repair in the airway wall— inflammatory cells release a variety of chemicals and lead to cellular damage. The inflammation process also contributes to the loss of elastic recoil pressure in the lung, thereby reducing the driving pressure for expiratory flow through narrowed and poorly supported airways, in which airflow resistance is significantly increased. Expiratory flow limitation is the pathophysiological hallmark of COPD. Exacerbations of COPD contribute considerably to morbidity and mortality, and impose a burden on the health care system. They are a leading cause of emergency room visits and hospitalizations, particularly in the winter. In Canada, the reported average cost for treating a moderate exacerbation is $641; for a major exacerbation, the cost is $10,086. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of the following interventions in moderate to very severe COPD, investigated in the Medical Advisory Secretariat Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Mega-Analysis Series: smoking cessation programs in moderate COPD in an outpatient setting: – intensive counselling (IC) versus usual care (UC). – nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) versus UC. – IC + NRT versus placebo. – bupropion versus placebo; multidisciplinary care (MDC) teams versus UC in moderate to severe COPD in an outpatient setting; pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) versus UC following acute exacerbations in moderate to severe COPD; long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) versus UC in severe hypoxemia in COPD in an outpatient setting; ventilation: – noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) + usual medical care versus usual medical care in acute respiratory failure due to an acute exacerbation in severe COPD in an inpatient setting. – weaning with NPPV versus weaning with invasive mechanical ventilation in acute respiratory failure due to an acute exacerbation in very severe COPD in an inpatient setting. METHODS A cost-utility analysis was conducted using a Markov probabilistic model. The model consists of different health states based on the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease COPD severity classification. Patients were assigned different costs and utilities depending on their severity health state during each model cycle. In addition to moving between health states, patients were at risk of acute exacerbations of COPD in each model cycle. During each cycle, patients could have no acute exacerbation, a minor acute exacerbation, or a major exacerbation. For the purposes of the model, a major exacerbation was defined as one that required hospitalization. Patients were assigned different costs and utilities in each model cycle, depending on whether they experienced an exacerbation, and its severity. Starting cohorts reflected the various patient populations from the trials analyzed. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs)—that is, costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY)—were estimated for each intervention using clinical parameters and summary estimates of relative risks of (re)hospitalization, as well as mortality and abstinence rates, from the COPD mega-analysis evidence-based analyses. A budget impact analysis was also conducted to project incremental costs already being incurred or resources already in use in Ontario. Using provincial data, medical literature, and expert opinion, health system impacts were calculated for the strategies investigated. All costs are reported in Canadian dollars. RESULTS All smoking cessation programs were dominant (i.e., less expensive and more effective overall). Assuming a base case cost of $1,041 and $1,527 per patient for MDC and PR, the ICER was calculated to be $14,123 per QALY and $17,938 per QALY, respectively. When the costs of MDC and PR were varied in a 1-way sensitivity analysis to reflect variation in resource utilization reported in the literature, the ICER increased to $55,322 per QALY and $56,270 per QALY, respectively. Assuming a base case cost of $2,261 per year per patient for LTOT as reported by data from the Ontario provincial program, the ICER was calculated to be $38,993 per QALY. Ventilation strategies were dominant (i.e., cheaper and more effective), as reflected by the clinical evidence of significant in-hospital days avoided in the study group. Ontario currently pays for IC through physician billing (translating to a current burden of $8 million) and bupropion through the Ontario Drug Benefit program (translating to a current burden of almost $2 million). The burden of NRT was projected to be $10 million, with future expenditures of up to $1 million in Years 1 to 3 for incident cases. Ontario currently pays for some chronic disease management programs. Based on the most recent Family Health Team data, the costs of MDC programs to manage COPD were estimated at $85 million in fiscal year 2010, with projected future expenditures of up to $51 million for incident cases, assuming the base case cost of the program. However, this estimate does not accurately reflect the current costs to the province because of lack of report by Family Health Teams, lack of capture of programs outside this model of care by any data set in the province, and because the resource utilization and frequency of visits/follow-up phone calls were based on the findings in the literature rather than the actual Family Health Team COPD management programs in place in Ontario. Therefore, MDC resources being utilized in the province are unknown and difficult to measure. Data on COPD-related hospitalizations were pulled from Ontario administrative data sets and based on consultation with experts. Half of hospitalized patients will access PR resources at least once, and half of these will repeat the therapy, translating to a potential burden of $17 million to $32 million, depending on the cost of the program. These resources are currently being absorbed, but since utilization is not being captured by any data set in the province, it is difficult to quantify and estimate. Provincial programs may be under-resourced, and patients may not be accessing these services effectively. Data from the LTOT provincial program (based on fiscal year 2006 information) suggested that the burden was $65 million, with potential expenditures of up to $0.2 million in Years 1 to 3 for incident cases. From the clinical evidence on ventilation (i.e., reduction in length of stay in hospital), there were potential cost savings to the hospitals of $42 million and $12 million for NPPV and weaning with NPPV, respectively, if the study intervention were adopted. Future cost savings were projected to be up to $4 million and $1 million, respectively, for incident cases. CONCLUSIONS Currently, costs for most of these interventions are being absorbed by provider services, the Ontario Drug Benefit Program, the Assistive Devices Program, and the hospital global budget. The most cost-effective intervention for COPD will depend on decision-makers’ willingness to pay. Lack of provincial data sets capturing resource utilization for the various interventions poses a challenge for estimating current burden and future expenditures.
Collapse
|