Many people with HCV and HBV infection are unaware of their condition, particularly at-risk and vulnerable populations who face barriers for screening and linkage to care. Emergency departments are often their only point of contact with the health system. This is a prospective study investigating HBsAg and HCV antibody testing, with reflex testing for HDV antibodies and HCV RNA, in adults attending an emergency department and requiring a blood test. Positive cases were linked to care. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed. From February 2020 to February 2022, a total of 17,560 individuals were screened. HBsAg was detected in 91 (0.5%), HCV RNA in 128 (0.7%), and HDV antibodies in two (0.01%) individuals. Nearly 40% of positive cases were unaware of their condition. Linkage to care was achieved in 42 of 56 HBsAg-positive and 45 of 69 HCV RNA-positive participants who were candidates for referral. HCV and HBV screening vs. no screening yielded 1.06 and 0.42 additional quality-adjusted life-years, respectively, with incremental cost–utility ratios of €7,629 and -€147 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, respectively, and proved even more cost-effective in patients with hepatitis C aged 40–70 years. On emergency department screening for hepatitis B, C, and D in Barcelona, the prevalence of HBsAg was 0.5% and HCV RNA 0.7%, approximately threefold higher than that observed in the general population. This strategy diagnosed patients with active HCV infection and no risk factors, who would not have been screened according to the current recommendations. Screening and linkage to care of viral hepatitis is cost-effective in this setting. We evaluated the performance and cost-effectiveness of a viral hepatitis screening programme implemented in an emergency department, which aimed to identify and link to care people living with hepatitis B and C. Our findings reveal a threefold higher prevalence of hepatitis B and C than in the general Spanish population, possibly attributable to the role of the emergency department as the main healthcare gateway for vulnerable populations, who have a higher prevalence of viral hepatitis. Risk factors for viral hepatitis could not be identified in most people living with hepatitis B and C attending the emergency department; hence, screening beyond risk factors should be considered in hepatitis detection strategies. Emergency department screening is cost-effective for hepatitis C and is a cost-saving strategy for hepatitis B in our setting. These data should inform future updates to clinical guidelines.

Elimination of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection requires high diagnostic rates and universal access to treatment. Around 40% of infected individuals are unaware of their infection, which indicates that effective screening strategies are needed. We analyzed the efficiency (incremental cost-utility ratio, ICUR) of 3 HCV screening strategies: a) general population of adults, b) high-risk groups, and c) population with the highest anti-HCV prevalence plus high-risk groups. An analytical decision model, projecting progression of the disease over a lifetime, was used to establish the candidate population for HCV screening. HCV data were obtained from the literature: anti-HCV prevalence (0.56%-1.54%), viremic patients (31.5%), and percentage of undiagnosed persons among those with viremia (35%). It was assumed that most patients would be treated and have HCV therapy response (98% SVR); transition probabilities, utilities, and disease management annual costs were obtained from the literature. Efficiency over the life of patients under the National Health System perspective was measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and total cost (screening, diagnosis, pharmacological and disease management). A discount rate of 3% was applied to costs and outcomes. Screening of the adult population would identify a larger number of additional chronic hepatitis C cases (N = 52,694) than screening the highest anti-HCV prevalence population plus high-risk groups (N = 42,027) or screening high-risk groups (N = 26,128). ICUR for the general population vs. high-risk groups was €8914/QALY gained per patient (€18,157 incremental cost and 2.037 QALY). ICUR for the general population vs. population with highest anti-HCV prevalence plus high-risk groups was €7,448/QALY gained per patient (€7,733 incremental cost and 1.038 QALY). These ICUR values are below the accepted efficiency threshold (€22,000-€30,000). HCV screening and treatment of the general adult population is cost-effective compared to screening of high-risk groups or the population with the highest anti-HCV prevalence plus high-risk groups.

According to WHO goals, the elimination of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) by 2030 requires enhancing and simplifying HCV testing. Our aim was to create a model to assess and compare different strategies for HCV testing, linkage to care and treatment among people who access harm reduction centres (HRC) and Addiction Centres in Catalonia. A decision tree model was designed to evaluate two strategies: Hepatitis C Point‐of‐care (POC) “test and treat”, at the community versus standard‐of‐care (SOC), in which HCV testing was performed at community and therapy at the hospital. Both strategies were assessed separately in HRCs (6,878 users) and Addiction Centres (13,778 users). with a time horizon of 18 months. Healthcare outcomes were HCV testing, linkage to care, treatment outcomes and reinfection rate. HCV testing was performed in 3,178 (46%) of the HRC users. Compared with SOC, POC increased access to treatment by 57% (63% vs. 6%). SVR rates were 64% in POC vs. 23% in SOC. Reinfection rates were 21% with POC compared to 24% with SOC. With POC, losses to follow‐up were reduced by 41%. In the Addiction Centres, 12,566 users (91%) were screened using the two strategies. Compared to the SOC, POC increased access to treatment and linkage to care by 19% along with SVR at the same rate. Reinfection rates decreased by 6%. Thus, the implementation of a POC “test and treat” strategy at HRCs and Addiction Centres has shown to be an effective public health strategy to help eliminating HCV in accordance with WHO goal.

Introduction: Prevalence of chronic hepatitis C (CHC) is higher in patients born between 1955–1975. The aim was to perform an economic evaluation of an age-based electronic health record (EHR) alert in primary care to detect patients with undiagnosed CHC and its treatment in comparison with non-use of the alert system, in Valencian Community, Spain.Materials and methods: Decision trees and Markov model were used to evaluate the diagnosis and progression of the disease, respectively. CHC was diagnosed by serology and viral load in seropositive subjects. Epidemiological data and diagnostic costs were extracted from public sources of the Valencian Community. Probabilities, utilities and costs of model states were obtained from the literature. The impact on mortality and hepatic complications avoided by the implementation of the alert were estimated, and efficiency was measured as an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) based on quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the costs of both alternatives.Results: The EHR alert detected 269,548 patients, of whom 1,331 had CHC (vs. 23 patients with non-alert). Over the patients’ lifetime, the alert would prevent 93% of decompensated cirrhosis cases, 87% of hepatocellular carcinomas, 90% of liver transplants, and 89% of liver related deaths compared to non-use of the alert system. In addition, it would obtain an additional 3.3 QALY per patient, with an incremental cost of €10,880 and an ICUR of €3,321.Conclusions: The implementation of an age-based EHR alert in primary care to detect patients with CHC reduces hepatic complications and mortality and is an efficient strategy.