10 resultados para care costs
Resumo:
This document summarizes the issues raised in a think-tank meeting held by professionals with expertise in pediatric Home Parenteral Nutrition. This nutritional technology enables patients to return home to their family and social environment, improves their quality of life and decreases health-care costs; however, it is complex and requires an experienced nutritional support team. Patient selection is normally made according to their underlying disease, the estimated duration of support and family and social characteristics. The patient''s family must agree to take on caregiver's responsibilities and should be able to perform treatment safely and effectively after receiving proper training from the nutritional support team. Close monitoring must be carried out to ensure tolerance and effectiveness of nutritional support, thereby avoiding complications. This nutritional treatment achieves, in most cases, recovery and intestinal adaptation in varying periods of time. In certain diseases, and when home parenteral nutrition becomes complicated, intestinal transplant may be recommendable, so referral to rehabilitation units and Intestinal Transplantation should be made early on.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND Tocilizumab (TCZ) was superior to adalimumab (ADA), as monotherapy, in reducing signs and symptoms of adult rheumatoid arthritis (RA) when methotrexate (MTX) treatment is poorly tolerated or inappropriate. The aim of the study was to analyze the cost-effectiveness of TCZ vs ADA in these patients. METHODS Economic evaluation of the cost per response or remission of TCZ vs ADA from ADACTA (time horizon: 24 weeks). Clinical response criteria ACR or disease remission criteria, DAS28. PERSPECTIVE National Health System. The costs included (acquisition, administration and monitoring of medicines; € 2012) were obtained from Spanish sources. Simple univariate sensitivity analyzes were performed. RESULTS ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70 response rates with TCZ and ADA were obtained in 65% and 49.4% (p <0.01), 47.2% and 27.8% (p <0.01); and 32.5% and 17.9% (p <0.01) of patients, respectively. DAS28 remission occurred in 39.9% and 10.5%, respectively (p <0.0001). The cost per response was lower with TCZ than with ADA (ACR20: € 8,105 and € 11,553; ACR50: € 11,162 and € 20,529; ACR70: € 16,211 and € 31,882) respectively. The cost of DAS28 remission was € 13,204 and € 54,352, respectively. Treatment with TCZ was dominant (more effective, with lower costs vs ADA) in all scenarios analyzed. CONCLUSIONS According to this analysis, in Spain TCZ monotherapy is an efficient strategy vs ADA for treating RA patients intolerant to MTX or in which there is inappropriate response.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND The high prevalence of women that do not reach the recommended level of physical activity is worrisome. A sedentary lifestyle has negative consequences on health status and increases health care costs. The main objective of this project is to assess the cost-effectiveness of a primary care-based exercise intervention in perimenopausal women. METHODS/DESIGN The present study is a Randomized Controlled Trial. A total of 150 eligible women will be recruited and randomly assigned to either a 16-week exercise intervention (3 sessions/week), or to usual care (control) group. The primary outcome measure is the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The secondary outcome measures are: i) socio-demographic and clinical information; ii) body composition; iii) dietary patterns; iv) glycaemic and lipid profile; v) physical fitness; vi) physical activity and sedentary behaviour; vii) sleep quality; viii) quality of life, mental health and positive health; ix) menopause symptoms. All outcomes will be assessed at baseline and post intervention. The data will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis and per protocol. In addition, we will conduct a cost effectiveness analysis from a health system perspective. DISCUSSION The intervention designed is feasible and if it proves to be clinically and cost effective, it can be easily transferred to other similar contexts. Consequently, the findings of this project might help the Health Systems to identify strategies for primary prevention and health promotion as well as to reduce health care requirements and costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02358109 . Date of registration: 05/02/2015.
Resumo:
Allergic conjunctivitis (AC) is an inflammatory disease of the conjunctiva caused mainly by an IgE-mediated mechanism. It is the most common type of ocular allergy. Despite being the most benign form of conjunctivitis, AC has a considerable effect on patient quality of life, reduces work productivity, and increases health care costs. No consensus has been reached on its classification, diagnosis, or treatment. Consequently, the literature provides little information on its natural history, epidemiological data are scarce, and it is often difficult to ascertain its true morbidity. The main objective of the Consensus Document on Allergic Conjunctivitis (Documento dE Consenso sobre Conjuntivitis Alérgica [DECA]), which was drafted by an expert panel from the Spanish Society of Allergology and Spanish Society of Ophthalmology, was to reach agreement on basic criteria that could prove useful for both specialists and primary care physicians and facilitate the diagnosis, classification, and treatment of AC. This document is the first of its kind to describe and analyze aspects of AC that could make it possible to control symptoms.
Resumo:
Economic evaluation of health care interventions has experienced a strong growth over the past decade and is increasingly present as a support tool in the decisions making process on public funding of health services and pricing in European countries. A necessary element using them is that agents that perform economic evaluations have minimum rules with agreement on methodological aspects. Although there are methodological issues in which there is a high degree of consensus, there are others in which there is no such degree of agreement being closest to the normative field or have experienced significant methodological advances in recent years. In this first article of a series of three, we will discuss on the perspective of analysis and assessment of costs in economic evaluation of health interventions using the technique Metaplan. Finally, research lines are proposed to overcome the identified discrepancies.
Resumo:
In this second article of a series of three, we will discuss using the Metaplan technique on controversial issues of health outcomes in economic evaluation of health care interventions. The four-discussion areas focus on: choice of health outcomes measures, where any outcome measure is superior to another; extrapolation and transferability of health outcomes measures, which should not be assumed the results of an EEIS of one country to another without making certain adjustments; appropriate instruments to measure quality of life in Spain, where the EQ-5D was indicated as convenient due to its widespread international use; and, indirect comparisons, where the combination of both comparisons, direct and indirect, it would be advisable if the test for indirect estimates is consistent and has been validated. Finally, research lines to try to overcome the identified discrepancies were identified in each of these areas, some of those are: doing studies of correlation between scores of specific and generic instruments measuring quality of life; update or create a database of economic evaluations in Spain; estimating utilities for the Spanish population by existing generic and specific instruments; or, establish a common way to show the results of a meta-analysis network.
Resumo:
The development of the economic evaluation of health care interventions has become a support tool in making decisions on pricing and reimbursement of new health interventions. The increasingly extensive application of these techniques has led to the identification of particular situations in which, for various reasons, it may be reasonable to take into account special considerations when applying the general principles of economic evaluation. In this article, which closes a series of three, we will discuss, using the Metaplan technique, about the economic evaluation of health interventions in special situations such as rare diseases and end of life treatments, as well as consideration of externalities in assessments, finally pointing out some research areas to solve the main problems identified in these fields.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND To assess and compare the effectiveness and costs of Phototest, Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), and Memory Impairment Screen (MIS) to screen for dementia (DEM) and cognitive impairment (CI). METHODS A phase III study was conducted over one year in consecutive patients with suspicion of CI or DEM at four Primary Care (PC) centers. After undergoing all screening tests at the PC center, participants were extensively evaluated by researchers blinded to screening test results in a Cognitive-Behavioral Neurology Unit (CBNU). The gold standard diagnosis was established by consensus of expert neurologists. Effectiveness was assessed by the proportion of correct diagnoses (diagnostic accuracy [DA]) and by the kappa index of concordance between test results and gold standard diagnoses. Costs were based on public prices and hospital accounts. RESULTS The study included 140 subjects (48 with DEM, 37 with CI without DEM, and 55 without CI). The MIS could not be applied to 23 illiterate subjects (16.4%). For DEM, the maximum effectiveness of the MMSE was obtained with different cutoff points as a function of educational level [k = 0.31 (95% Confidence interval [95%CI], 0.19-0.43), DA = 0.60 (95%CI, 0.52-0.68)], and that of the MIS with a cutoff of 3/4 [k = 0.63 (95%CI, 0.48-0.78), DA = 0.83 (95%CI, 0.80-0.92)]. Effectiveness of the Phototest [k = 0.71 (95%CI, 0.59-0.83), DA = 0.87 (95%CI, 0.80-0.92)] was similar to that of the MIS and higher than that of the MMSE. Costs were higher with MMSE (275.9 ± 193.3€ [mean ± sd euros]) than with Phototest (208.2 ± 196.8€) or MIS (201.3 ± 193.4€), whose costs did not significantly differ. For CI, the effectiveness did not significantly differ between MIS [k = 0.59 (95%CI, 0.45-0.74), DA = 0.79 (95%CI, 0.64-0.97)] and Phototest [k = 0.58 (95%CI, 0.45-0.74), DA = 0.78 (95%CI, 0.64-0.95)] and was lowest for the MMSE [k = 0.27 (95%CI, 0.09-0.45), DA = 0.69 (95%CI, 0.56-0.84)]. Costs were higher for MMSE (393.4 ± 121.8€) than for Phototest (287.0 ± 197.4€) or MIS (300.1 ± 165.6€), whose costs did not significantly differ. CONCLUSION MMSE is not an effective instrument in our setting. For both DEM and CI, the Phototest and MIS are more effective and less costly, with no difference between them. However, MIS could not be applied to the appreciable percentage of our population who were illiterate.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND Pressure ulcers are considered an important issue, mainly affecting immobilized older patients. These pressure ulcers increase the care burden for the professional health service staff as well as pharmaceutical expenditure. There are a number of studies on the effectiveness of different products used for the prevention of pressure ulcers; however, most of these studies were carried out at a hospital level, basically using hyperoxygenated fatty acids (HOFA). There are no studies focused specifically on the use of olive-oil-based products and therefore this research is intended to find the most cost-effective treatment and achieve an alternative treatment. METHODS/DESIGN The main objective is to assess the effectiveness of olive oil, comparing it with HOFA, to treat immobilized patients at home who are at risk of pressure ulcers. As a secondary objective, the cost-effectiveness balance of this new application with regard to the HOFA will be assessed. The study is designed as a noninferiority, triple-blinded, parallel, multi-center, randomized clinical trial. The scope of the study is the population attending primary health centers in Andalucía (Spain) in the regional areas of Malaga, Granada, Seville, and Cadiz. Immobilized patients at risk of pressure ulcers will be targeted. The target group will be treated by application of an olive-oil-based formula whereas the control group will be treated by application of HOFA to the control group. The follow-up period will be 16 weeks. The main variable will be the presence of pressure ulcers in the patient. Secondary variables include sociodemographic and clinical information, caregiver information, and whether technical support exists. Statistical analysis will include the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, symmetry and kurtosis analysis, bivariate analysis using the Student's t and chi-squared tests as well as the Wilcoxon and the Man-Whitney U tests, ANOVA and multivariate logistic regression analysis. DISCUSSION The regular use of olive-oil-based formulas should be effective in preventing pressure ulcers in immobilized patients, thus leading to a more cost-effective product and an alternative treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01595347.