The cost-effectiveness and public health benefit of nalmefene added to psychosocial support for the reduction of alcohol consumption in alcohol-dependent patients with high/very high drinking risk levels: a Markov model.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether nalmefene combined with psychosocial support is cost-effective compared with psychosocial support alone for reducing alcohol consumption in alcohol-dependent patients with high/very high drinking risk levels (DRLs) as defined by the WHO, and to evaluate the public health benefit of reducing harmful alcohol-attributable diseases, injuries and deaths. DESIGN: Decision modelling using Markov chains compared costs and effects over 5 years. SETTING: The analysis was from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) in England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: The model considered the licensed population for nalmefene, specifically adults with both alcohol dependence and high/very high DRLs, who do not require immediate detoxification and who continue to have high/very high DRLs after initial assessment. DATA SOURCES: We modelled treatment effect using data from three clinical trials for nalmefene (ESENSE 1 (NCT00811720), ESENSE 2 (NCT00812461) and SENSE (NCT00811941)). Baseline characteristics of the model population, treatment resource utilisation and utilities were from these trials. We estimated the number of alcohol-attributable events occurring at different levels of alcohol consumption based on published epidemiological risk-relation studies. Health-related costs were from UK sources. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and number of alcohol-attributable harmful events avoided. RESULTS: Nalmefene in combination with psychosocial support had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £5204 per QALY gained, and was therefore cost-effective at the £20,000 per QALY gained decision threshold. Sensitivity analyses showed that the conclusion was robust. Nalmefene plus psychosocial support led to the avoidance of 7179 alcohol-attributable diseases/injuries and 309 deaths per 100,000 patients compared to psychosocial support alone over the course of 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Nalmefene can be seen as a cost-effective treatment for alcohol dependence, with substantial public health benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: This cost-effectiveness analysis was developed based on data from three randomised clinical trials: ESENSE 1 (NCT00811720), ESENSE 2 (NCT00812461) and SENSE (NCT00811941).

Effect of a national primary care pay for performance scheme on emergency hospital admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions: controlled longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the impact of a national primary care pay for performance scheme, the Quality and Outcomes Framework in England, on emergency hospital admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs). DESIGN: Controlled longitudinal study. SETTING: English National Health Service between 1998/99 and 2010/11. PARTICIPANTS: Populations registered with each of 6975 family practices in England. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Year specific differences between trend adjusted emergency hospital admission rates for incentivised ACSCs before and after the introduction of the Quality and Outcomes Framework scheme and two comparators: non-incentivised ACSCs and non-ACSCs. RESULTS: Incentivised ACSC admissions showed a relative reduction of 2.7% (95% confidence interval 1.6% to 3.8%) in the first year of the Quality and Outcomes Framework compared with ACSCs that were not incentivised. This increased to a relative reduction of 8.0% (6.9% to 9.1%) in 2010/11. Compared with conditions that are not regarded as being influenced by the quality of ambulatory care (non-ACSCs), incentivised ACSCs also showed a relative reduction in rates of emergency admissions of 2.8% (2.0% to 3.6%) in the first year increasing to 10.9% (10.1% to 11.7%) by 2010/11. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a major national pay for performance scheme for primary care in England was associated with a decrease in emergency admissions for incentivised conditions compared with conditions that were not incentivised. Contemporaneous health service changes seem unlikely to have caused the sharp change in the trajectory of incentivised ACSC admissions immediately after the introduction of the Quality and Outcomes Framework. The decrease seems larger than would be expected from the changes in the process measures that were incentivised, suggesting that the pay for performance scheme may have had impacts on quality of care beyond the directly incentivised activities.

Simulated Patient as Co-facilitators: Benefits and Challenges of the Interprofessional Team OSCE (Submission #9350).

Hypothesis: The quality of care for chronic patients depends on the collaborative skills of the healthcare providers.1,2 The literature lacks reports of the use of simulation to teach collaborative skills in non-acute care settings. We posit that simulation offers benefits for supporting the development of collaborative practice in non-acute settings. We explored the benefits and challenges of using an Interprofessional Team - Objective Structured Clinical Examination (IT-OSCE) as a formative assessment tool. IT-OSCE is an intervention which involves an interprofessional team of trainees interacting with a simulated patient (SP) enabling them to practice collaborative skills in non-acute care settings.5 A simulated patient are people trained to portray patients in a simulated scenario for educational purposes.6,7 Since interprofessional education (IPE) ultimately aims to provide collaborative patient-centered care.8,9 We sought to promote patient-centeredness in the learning process. Methods: The IT-OSCE was conducted with four trios of students from different professions. The debriefing was co-facilitated by the SP with a faculty. The participants were final-year students in nursing, physiotherapy and medicine. Our research question focused on the introduction of co-facilitated (SP and faculty) debriefing after an IT-OSCE: 1) What are the benefits and challenges of involving the SP during the debriefing? and 2) To evaluate the IT-OSCE, an exploratory case study was used to provide fine grained data 10, 11. Three focus groups were conducted - two with students (n=6; n=5), one with SPs (n=3) and one with faculty (n=4). Audiotapes were transcribed for thematic analysis performed by three researchers, who found a consensus on the final set of themes. Results: The thematic analysis showed little differentiation between SPs, student and faculty perspectives. The analysis of transcripts revealed more particularly, that the SP's co-facilitation during the debriefing of an IT-OSCE proved to be feasible. It was appreciated by all the participants and appeared to value and to promote patient-centeredness in the learning process. The main challenge consisted in SPs feedback, more particularly in how they could report accurate observations to a students' group rather than individual students. Conclusion: In conclusion, SP methodology using an IT-OSCE seems to be a useful and promising way to train collaborative skills, aligning IPE, simulation-based team training in a non-acute care setting and patient-centeredness. We acknowledge the limitations of the study, especially the small sample and consider the exploration of SP-based IPE in non-acute care settings as strength. Future studies could consider the preparation of SPs and faculty as co-facilitators. References: 1. Borrill CS, Carletta J, Carter AJ, et al. The effectiveness of health care teams in the National Health Service. Aston centre for Health Service Organisational Research. 2001. 2. Reeves S, Lewin S, Espin S, Zwarenstein M. Interprofessional teamwork for health and social care. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010. 3. Issenberg S, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Gordon DL, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning - a BEME systematic review. Medical Teacher. 2005;27(1):10-28. 4. McGaghie W, Petrusa ER, Gordon DL, Scalese RJ. A critical review of simulation-based medical education research: 2003-2009. Medical Education. 2010;44(1):50-63. 5. Simmons B, Egan-Lee E, Wagner SJ, Esdaile M, Baker L, Reeves S. Assessment of interprofessional learning: the design of an interprofessional objective structured clinical examination (iOSCE) approach. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2011;25(1):73-74. 6. Nestel D, Layat Burn C, Pritchard SA, Glastonbury R, Tabak D. The use of simulated patients in medical education: Guide Supplement 42.1 - Viewpoint. Medical teacher. 2011;33(12):1027-1029. Disclosures: None (C) 2014 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.