Background: Depression disorders are a leading cause of disability in the world which imposes a significant economic burden on patients and societies The present study aimed to determine the economic burden of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) on the patients referred to the reference psychiatric single-specialty hospitals in southern Iran in 2020.Methods: This cross-sectional research is a partial economic evaluation and a cost-of-illness study conducted in southern Iran in 2020. A total of 563 patients were enrolled through the census method, and a researcher-made data collection form was used to gather the required information. The prevalence-based and the bottom-up approaches were also used to collect the cost information and calculate the costs, respectively. The data on direct medical, direct non-medical, and indirect costs were obtained using the information in the patients’ medical records and insurance bills as well as their self-reports or those of their companions. To calculate the indirect costs, the human capital approach was used as well.Results: The results showed that the annual cost of MDD was $ 2717.41 Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) (USD 2026.13) per patient in 2020. Direct medical costs accounted for the largest share of the costs (73.68%), of which hoteling and regular beds expenses were the highest (57.70% of the total direct medical costs). The shares of direct non-medical and indirect costs were 7.52 and 18.80%, respectively, and the economic burden of the disease in the country was estimated at $7,120,456,596 PPP (USD 5,309,088,699).Conclusion: In general, due to the high prevalence of MDD and the chronicity of the disease, the costs of its treatment can impose a heavy economic burden on the society, healthcare system, insurance system, and the patients themselves. Therefore, it is suggested that health policymakers and managers should take appropriate measures to increase the basic and supplemental insurance coverage of these patients. In addition, in order to reduce the costs, proper and equitable distribution of psychiatrists and psychiatric beds, expansion of home care services, and use of Internet-based technologies and the cyberspace to follow up the treatment of these patients are recommended.

Introduction: Ceftazidime avibactam (CA) is an effective treatment against carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), but its cost-effectiveness is unclear. This study was performed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CA against the best available treatment colistin (Col) for patients with CRE-related infections in Iran. Methodology: A model of a decision tree was designed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CA in CRE patients over a period of 5 years. The Iran health system was the perspective of the study, and the discount rates of 5.8% and 3% were considered for the data of cost and utility, respectively. The clinical inputs were obtained from a prospective observational study. We established the costs of medical services and medical tariffs of Iran’s health system, and obtained the rate of medical service resources used by patients from specialists. The results of this model included the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), increasing costs, and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR). We also performed the deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results: CA reduced the burden of related to treatment failure and the need for treatment of nephrotoxicity and chronic failure, whereas, the costs related to drug procurement and long-term care (due to longer survival) increased. Treatment with CA versus Col resulted in a 53% increase in QALYs and $425 in costs, leading to an ICUR equal to 798 $/QALYs. Sensitivity analyses proved the model’s strength and indicated that the cost-effectiveness of CA can reach 88% when paying 1111 $/QALY. Budget impact analysis estimated CA regimen will increase the health system costs by $1,270,462 in 5 years. Conclusion: In Iranian settings, CA can significantly increase the quality of life and patients’ survival; therefore, in comparison to the Col drug regimen, CA is a cost-effective strategy.

Low-dose aspirin and rivaroxaban are the cornerstone treatment for cardiovascular prevention in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) and/or stable coronary artery disease (SCAD). The combination of rivaroxaban with aspirin imposes a synergistic effect on the inhibition of factor-induced platelet aggregation. The present work aimed at comparing the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban alone (5 mg twice daily) with aspirin alone in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) or coronary artery disease (CAD) and related subgroups. This pharmacoeconomic study was performed based on the insurance organization and utilized a state-transition decision Markov model. From the COMPASS trial, Clinical efficacy and Clinical events were collected. Health outcomes and cost were assessed over a 20-year time horizon (lifetime). The direct costs of medical services were included in the analysis. The results were stated based on Incremental Cost-Utility (ICUR) and Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER). Uncertainty was assessed utilizing deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Discount rates of .058 and .03 were included for cost and effectiveness data, respectively. The budget impact based on the Markov model was estimated as the financial burden resulting from the insurance coverage of rivaroxaban. In the total of CAD and PAD patients, treatment with rivaroxaban plus aspirin and rivaroxaban alone were more expensive than the aspirin alone, but also more effective, resulting in ICUR being $4594/QALY and $13601/QALY respectively, and for ICER being $3348/LYG and $9901/LYG. In PAD patients rivaroxaban plus aspirin had higher effectiveness than aspirin alone that ICUR and ICER being $11929/QALY and $9896/LYG respectively. In CAD patients, treatment with rivaroxaban plus aspirin was expensive and less effective than aspirin alone. The estimated annual budget impact was $28,253,135 for the rivaroxaban plus aspirin and $292,593,909 for the rivaroxaban alone in the total of CAD and PAD patients. This study showed that rivaroxaban plus aspirin is a cost-effective alternative in PAD and total of CAD and PAD patients. In CAD patients, rivaroxaban plus aspirin and rivaroxaban alone were not cost-effective.

Changes in the demand behavior for primary care during the covid-19 pandemic may translate into changes in the overall public health situation in Iran with the increase in the prevalence of non-communicable diseases. The present study aimed to investigate the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the primary health care utilization and cost in Fars province of Iran. Monthly utilization and cost of primary health care was extracted from the data base of Fars province branch of Iran Health Insurance Organization (IHIO) in Iran. The interrupted time series analysis (ITSA) was used to investigate the short-term and long-term effects of Covid-19 on the utilization and cost of primary health care. The mean difference test showed that the monthly utilization and cost of primary health care after Covid-19 has decreased significantly (64307 for utilization and 11581 US dollars for cost). The ITSA estimates showed that the number of monthly primary health care visits after Covid-19 has decreased significantly by 53,003 in the short term and 2,330 in the long term. Moreover, the cost of primary health care shows a significant decrease of $24,722 and $3,822 per month in the short term and in the long term, respectively. It found a significant reduction in the utilization of primary health care. Considering the role of primary care in controlling the burden of chronic diseases, planning for active follow-up of patients with chronic conditions should be on the agenda.