{"title":"The Importance of Treatment Adherence and Long-Term Outcomes in Health Economic Impact Evaluations.","authors":"Manon Pigeolet","doi":"10.1002/hec.70152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Wydick et al. recently estimated the impact of Ponseti clubfoot treatment on human flourishing in Ethiopia, providing important evidence for scaling clubfoot programs in low- and middle-income countries. However, their definition of \"treated\" warrants scrutiny. Considering children in the final stages of casting as treated, only captures outcomes during the early stage of a 4-year treatment course, implicitly assuming full bracing adherence and no relapse. This is inconsistent with relapse rates of 30%-40% and two-year discontinuation rates exceeding 50% in comparable settings. This choice of definition likely underestimates late-initiated treatment impact and overestimates early-initiated treatment impact. Modeling the clubfoot care pathway as a probabilistic value model incorporating dropout, non-adherence, and relapse, I re-estimate population-level functional outcomes at mid-childhood. In settings without additional surgical care availability the mean level of functionality is estimated at 55.2% of normal function (95% CI 54.6%-55.9%), showing that enrollment expansion alone cannot achieve impact at the scale implied. Achieving clubfoot treatment's full potential at scale requires comprehensive, longitudinal care beyond initial Ponseti treatment, and stronger collaboration between clinical and health-economics communities to ground future estimates in clinical reality.</p>","PeriodicalId":12847,"journal":{"name":"Health economics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.70152","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Wydick et al. recently estimated the impact of Ponseti clubfoot treatment on human flourishing in Ethiopia, providing important evidence for scaling clubfoot programs in low- and middle-income countries. However, their definition of "treated" warrants scrutiny. Considering children in the final stages of casting as treated, only captures outcomes during the early stage of a 4-year treatment course, implicitly assuming full bracing adherence and no relapse. This is inconsistent with relapse rates of 30%-40% and two-year discontinuation rates exceeding 50% in comparable settings. This choice of definition likely underestimates late-initiated treatment impact and overestimates early-initiated treatment impact. Modeling the clubfoot care pathway as a probabilistic value model incorporating dropout, non-adherence, and relapse, I re-estimate population-level functional outcomes at mid-childhood. In settings without additional surgical care availability the mean level of functionality is estimated at 55.2% of normal function (95% CI 54.6%-55.9%), showing that enrollment expansion alone cannot achieve impact at the scale implied. Achieving clubfoot treatment's full potential at scale requires comprehensive, longitudinal care beyond initial Ponseti treatment, and stronger collaboration between clinical and health-economics communities to ground future estimates in clinical reality.
Wydick等人最近估计了蓬塞蒂马蹄内翻足治疗对埃塞俄比亚人类繁荣的影响,为在低收入和中等收入国家扩大马蹄内翻足项目提供了重要证据。然而,他们对“治疗”的定义值得仔细审查。考虑到儿童在铸造治疗的最后阶段,仅捕获在4年治疗过程的早期阶段的结果,隐含地假设完全支架依从性和无复发。这与可比环境中30%-40%的复发率和超过50%的两年停药率不一致。这种定义的选择可能低估了晚开始治疗的影响,高估了早开始治疗的影响。将内翻足护理路径建模为包含退学、不依从性和复发的概率值模型,我重新估计了儿童中期人群水平的功能结果。在没有额外手术护理的情况下,平均功能水平估计为正常功能的55.2% (95% CI 54.6%-55.9%),表明单靠扩大纳入人数不能达到所隐含的规模。要实现足内翻症治疗的全部潜力,需要在最初的庞氏病治疗之外进行全面的纵向护理,并需要临床和卫生经济学社区之间加强合作,以临床现实为基础进行未来的估计。
期刊介绍:
This Journal publishes articles on all aspects of health economics: theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy from the economic perspective. Its scope includes the determinants of health and its definition and valuation, as well as the demand for and supply of health care; planning and market mechanisms; micro-economic evaluation of individual procedures and treatments; and evaluation of the performance of health care systems.
Contributions should typically be original and innovative. As a rule, the Journal does not include routine applications of cost-effectiveness analysis, discrete choice experiments and costing analyses.
Editorials are regular features, these should be concise and topical. Occasionally commissioned reviews are published and special issues bring together contributions on a single topic. Health Economics Letters facilitate rapid exchange of views on topical issues. Contributions related to problems in both developed and developing countries are welcome.