Background: Whether to cover cardiovascular disease costs is an increasingly pressing question for low- and middle-income countries. We sought to identify the impact of expanding national insurance to cover primary prevention, secondary prevention, and tertiary treatment for cardiovascular disease in India.
Methods and results: We incorporated data from coverage experiments into a validated microsimulation model of myocardial infarction and stroke in India to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of alternate coverage strategies. Coverage of primary prevention alone saved 3.6 million disability-adjusted life-years (DALY) per annum at an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $469 per DALY averted when compared with the status quo of no coverage. Coverage of primary and secondary preventions was dominated by a strategy of covering primary prevention and tertiary treatment, which prevented 6.6 million DALYs at an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $2241 per DALY averted, when compared with that of primary prevention alone. The combination of all 3 categories yielded the greatest impact at an incremental cost per DALY averted of $5588 when compared with coverage of primary prevention plus tertiary treatment. When compared with the status quo of no coverage, coverage of all 3 categories of prevention/treatment yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1331 per DALY averted. In sensitivity analyses, coverage of primary preventive treatments remained cost-effective even if adherence and access to therapy were low, but tertiary coverage would require avoiding unnecessary procedures to remain cost-effective.
Conclusions: Coverage of all 3 major types of cardiovascular treatment would be expected to have high impact and reasonable cost-effectiveness in India across a broad spectrum of access and adherence levels.
Keywords: cost-effectiveness; developing countries; health policy; healthcare economics and organizations; insurance; myocardial infarction; stroke.
© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.