Budget impact analysis of contraceptive devices on Brazilian supplementary health

Authors

  • Felipe Mainka Centro de Pesquisa e Inovação, Unimed Curitiba, Curitiba, PR, Brasil.
  • Harli Netto Centro de Farmacoeconomia, Medicalc.me, Curitiba, PR, Brasil.
  • Gislaine Souza Suprimentos, Unimed Curitiba, Curitiba, PR, Brasil.
  • Beatriz Böger Centro de Pesquisa e Inovação, Unimed Curitiba, Curitiba, PR, Brasil.
  • Anne Fiebrantz Centro de Pesquisa e Inovação, Unimed Curitiba, Curitiba, PR, Brasil.
  • Jolline Lind Centro de Pesquisa e Inovação, Unimed Curitiba, Curitiba, PR, Brasil.
  • Bianca Aguiar Centro de Pesquisa e Inovação, Unimed Curitiba, Curitiba, PR, Brasil.
  • Moacir Ramos Centro de Pesquisa e Inovação, Unimed Curitiba, Curitiba, PR, Brasil.
  • Jaime Rocha Centro de Pesquisa e Inovação, Unimed Curitiba, Curitiba, PR, Brasil.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21115/JBES.v15.n2.p109-15

Keywords:

cost-effectiveness, contraception, etonogestrel, implanon, implants, levonorgestrel, economic evaluation

Abstract

Objective: To analyze the budgetary impact of the adoption of long-acting reversible contraceptive devices in a health plan operator located in southern Brazil. Specifically, we analyzed the incorporation of the etonogestrel subdermal implant (Implanon®) as an alternative to the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (Mirena® IUD or Kyleena® IUD), over a period of 15 years. Methods: We performed an analysis of the incremental budgetary impact, considering the gradual inclusion of the etonogestrel subdermal implant. Data from a health plan operator with more than 600,000 beneficiaries were considered. The 15-year time horizon allowed for a comprehensive assessment of the financial effects. Results: We identified 5,345 patients eligible for the use of long-acting reversible contraceptives. In the scenario where only the levonorgestrel intrauterine system was adopted, a total budget impact of BRL 746,379,857.80 was projected over 15 years. In the alternative scenario, with the gradual incorporation of the subdermal implant, the total budgetary impact was calculated at BRL 689,800,196.83. This resulted in a negative incremental budgetary impact of -R$56,579,660.97 over the period. Conclusion: The budget impact analysis carried out indicates a potential financial benefit in adopting the etonogestrel subdermal implant as an alternative to the levonorgestrel intrauterine system for contraception. This finding suggests possible cost reductions in the supplementary healthcare area in Brazil, reinforcing the importance of evaluating economically viable options.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Published

2024-05-27

How to Cite

Mainka, F., Netto, H., Souza, G., Böger, B., Fiebrantz, A., Lind, J., … Rocha, J. (2024). Budget impact analysis of contraceptive devices on Brazilian supplementary health. Jornal Brasileiro De Economia Da Saúde, 15(2), 109–115. https://doi.org/10.21115/JBES.v15.n2.p109-15

Issue

Section

Artigos