Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 24.938
Filtrar
1.
Hipertens. riesgo vasc ; 41(1): 40-57, Ene-Mar, 2024. tab
Artículo en Inglés | IBECS | ID: ibc-ADZ-275

RESUMEN

Objective: Review of some of the best-known biological and non-biological complementary/alternative therapies/medicines (CAM) and their relationship with blood pressure (BP) and hypertension (HT). Search strategy: Narrative review assessing a recent series of systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and clinical trials published in recent years, focusing on the effects of CAM on BP and HT. Selection of studies: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar, obtaining a total of 4336 articles, finally limiting the search to 181 after applying filters. Synthesis of results: Some studies on biological therapies show some usefulness in BP reduction with an adequate benefit–risk balance, although there is a scarcity of high-quality trials that support these results. Some mind-body therapies have shown hypothetical benefit; in contrast, others lack robust evidence. Conclusions: Although some therapies present a reasonable risk–benefit ratio, they should in no case replace pharmacological treatment when indicated.(AU)


Objetivo: Revisar algunas de las más conocidas terapias/medicinas biológicas y no biológicas complementarias/alternativas (MCA), y su relación con la presión arterial (PA) e hipertensión arterial (HTA). Estrategia de búsqueda: Revisión narrativa en la que se valoraron una serie reciente de revisiones sistemáticas, metaanálisis y ensayos clínicos publicados en los últimos años, centrada en los efectos de la MCA sobre la PA y HTA. Selección de estudios: Se realizaron búsquedas en EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library y Google Scholar, obteniéndose un total de 4.336 artículos, limitándose finalmente a 181 tras aplicar filtros. Síntesis de resultados: Algunos trabajos sobre terapias biológicas parecen demostrar cierta utilidad en reducción de la PA con adecuado balance beneficio/riesgo, aunque existe escasez de ensayos de alta calidad que avalen estos resultados. Algunas terapias cuerpo/mente han mostrado un hipotético beneficio; en cambio, otras carecen de evidencia robusta. Conclusiones: Aunque algunas terapias presentan una relación riesgo/beneficio razonable, no deberían sustituir en ningún caso al tratamiento farmacológico cuando este esté indicado.(AU)


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Terapias Complementarias , Hipertensión , Presión Arterial , Terapia Biológica , Quimioterapia , Terapéutica
2.
Rev. patol. respir ; 27(1)ene.-mar2024. tab, graf
Artículo en Español | IBECS | ID: ibc-ADZ-291

RESUMEN

La oscilometría es una herramienta que, poco a poco, se está abriendo paso en las consultas de neumología y alergología. Se trata de una técnica sencilla de realizar para el paciente, que, además, aporta información adicional a las pruebas de función respiratoria clásicas. No solamente nos indica la alteración que existe en la vía aérea, sino que localiza a qué altura se produce (central o periférica). El objetivo es acercar esta técnica al personal sanitario y hacer más sencilla su interpretación. (AU)


Oscillometry is a tool that is gradually making its way into the daily routine of pneumology and allergology. It is a simple technique for the patient, which also provides additional information to the classic respiratory function tests. It not only indicates if there is an alteration in the airway, but also locates where it occurs (central or peripheral). The aim is to bring this technique closer to healthcare professionals and facilitate its interpretation. (AU)


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Fisiología , Oscilometría , Neumología , Alergia e Inmunología , Pulmón
3.
Med. clín (Ed. impr.) ; 162(6): 273-279, Mar. 2024. mapas, graf, tab
Artículo en Español | IBECS | ID: ibc-VR-236

RESUMEN

Antecedentes y objetivo: El sedentarismo es un factor predictivo para numerosas enfermedades. El objetivo de este estudio fue valorar la evolución de la prevalencia de sedentarismo en la población española adulta entre los años 1987-2020. Métodos: Las fuentes de datos fueron las Encuestas Nacionales y Europeas de Salud. La prevalencia de sedentarismo se valoró en 3 escenarios (actividad principal, tiempo libre y todos los escenarios). Se estimaron prevalencias de sedentarismo global, por sexo y grupo de edad. En todos los escenarios la prevalencia también se estimó por comunidad autónoma. La tendencia de las prevalencias se analizó con los porcentajes de cambio anual (PCA) obtenidos a través de modelos joinpoint. Resultados: La prevalencia de sedentarismo en la actividad principal varió entre el 31,2% en 1987 y el 38,4% en 2020 (PCA: 0,7 [0,5 a 1,0]), siendo mayor en los varones que en las mujeres, y más elevada en los más jóvenes y en los más mayores. La prevalencia de sedentarismo en el tiempo libre varió entre el 55,1% en 1993 y el 36,4% en 2020 (PCA: −1,4 [−1,9 a −0,9]), siendo siempre superior en las mujeres, más alta en los mayores de 64 años y menor en los de 16-24 años. Cantabria y Canarias fueron las comunidades autónomas con la prevalencia de sedentarismo más baja en todos los escenarios. Conclusiones: La prevalencia de sedentarismo en la actividad principal está aumentando en España, mientras que durante el tiempo libre está descendiendo. Es importante aplicar medidas de prevención y promoción de la salud dirigidas a disminuir el sedentarismo en la población.(AU)


Background and objective: Sedentary behavior is a predictive factor for numerous diseases. The objective of this study was to assess the evolution of the prevalence of sedentary behavior in the Spanish adult population between 1987 and 2020. Methods: The data sources were the National and European Health Surveys. The prevalence of sedentary behavior was assessed in three scenarios (main activity, leisure time and all scenarios). Prevalence of sedentary behavior was estimated overall, by sex and age group. In all scenarios, prevalence was also estimated by Autonomous Community. The prevalence trend was analyzed with the annual percent change (APC) obtained through joinpoint models. Results: The prevalence of sedentary in the main activity ranged from 31.2% in 1987 to 38.4% in 2020 [PCA: 0.7 (0.5-1.0)], being higher in men than in women and higher in younger and older people. The prevalence of sedentary in the leisure time varied between 55.1% in 1993 and 36.4% in 2020 [PCA: −1.4 (−1.9 to −0.9)], being always higher in women, higher in those over 64 years of age and lower in those aged 16–24 years. Cantabria and the Canary Islands were the Autonomous Communities with the lowest prevalence of sedentary behavior in all scenarios. Conclusions: The prevalence of sedentary behavior in the main activity is increasing in Spain, whereas during leisure time it is decreasing. It is important to implement prevention and health promotion measures aimed at reducing sedentary behavior in the population.(AU)


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Ejercicio Físico , Conducta Sedentaria , Prevalencia , Encuestas Epidemiológicas , España , Medicina Clínica
4.
Fisioterapia (Madr., Ed. impr.) ; 46(1): 42-51, ene.-feb. 2024. ilus, tab
Artículo en Español | IBECS | ID: ibc-EMG-493

RESUMEN

Introducción La sarcopenia en los pacientes con fractura de cadera es cada vez más habitual en la población envejecida, aumentando el riesgo de hospitalización, dependencia y mortalidad. Objetivos Valorar el tratamiento de fisioterapia más efectivo en los pacientes con sarcopenia y fractura de cadera a través de la revisión de evidencia sistemática. Métodos Se realizó una búsqueda entre febrero y mayo de 2022 en 8 bases de datos electrónicas (Pubmed, Scopus, PEDro, Web of Science, Cochrane, Google Scholar y Springer Link), con el fin de extraer ensayos clínicos publicados en los últimos 12 años en español e inglés. Resultados Se seleccionaron 3 ensayos clínicos que cumplían los criterios de inclusión. En todos ellos las intervenciones de fisioterapia incluían ejercicio aeróbico, de fuerza, de alta intensidad, de movilizaciones y combinados. La calidad metodológica se evaluó con la escala PEDro (puntuación media entre 6 y 10). Uno de los estudios no encuentra diferencias entre el tratamiento estándar y el grupo que recibe además entrenamiento progresivo de fuerza muscular. Otro constata una mejora a corto plazo en el grupo que recibe además del tratamiento convencional entrenamiento en cinta rodante con soporte del peso corporal durante el ejercicio con seguimiento a los 3 y 6 meses. El estudio que suplementa con aminoácidos esenciales es el único que constata una mejoría en los pacientes con sarcopenia. Conclusión Los pacientes con sarcopenia y fractura de cadera, pueden tener una mejor evolución si combinan ejercicios de fisioterapia con un protocolo nutricional. Son necesarias más investigaciones metodológicamente rigurosas sobre este tema para poder ampliar la evidencia. (AU)


Introduction Sarcopenia in patients with hip fracture is increasingly common in the elderly population, increasing the risk of hospitalization, dependency, and mortality. Objectives To assess the most effective physiotherapy treatment in patients with sarcopenia and hip fracture through systematic evidence review. Methods Electronic databases were searched from February to May 2022 using Pubmed, Scopus, PEDro, Web of Science, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and Springer Link in order to extract randomized clinical trials published in full text both English and Spanish for the last 12 years. Results Three clinical trials that met the inclusion criteria were selected. In all of them, the physiotherapy interventions included aerobic, strength, high intensity, mobilization, and combined exercises. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale (average score between 6 and 10). One of the studies found no differences between the standard treatment and the group that also received progressive muscle strength training. Another found a short-term improvement in the group that received, in addition to conventional treatment, treadmill training with body weight support during exercise with follow-up that was not maintained at three and six months. The study that supplements with essential amino acids is the only one that confirms an improvement in patients with sarcopenia. Conclusion Patients with sarcopenia and hip fracture may have a better evolution if they combine physiotherapy exercises with a nutritional protocol. More methodologically rigorous research on this topic is needed to expand the evidence. (AU)


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Sarcopenia , Fracturas de Cadera , Modalidades de Fisioterapia , Terapia por Ejercicio
5.
J. physiol. biochem ; 80(1): 175-188, Feb. 2024. ilus, graf
Artículo en Inglés | IBECS | ID: ibc-EMG-575

RESUMEN

Lipotoxicity-induced pancreatic β cell damage is a strong predictor of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Our previous work showed that Caveolin-1 (Cav-1) depletion decreased β-cell apoptosis and improved β-cell viability. Further microarray analysis indicated significant changes in the expression of genes related to fatty acid metabolism and inflammation. The objective of this study was to explore the role of Cav-1 in intracellular lipid accumulation and inflammation in β cells under lipotoxic conditions. Here, we established a β-cell-specific Cav-1 knockout (β-Cav-1 KO) mouse model and a CAV-1 depleted β cell line (NIT-1). We found that Cav-1 silencing significantly reduced palmitate (PA)-induced intracellular triglyceride (TG) accumulation and decreased proinflammatory factor expression in both the mouse and cell models. Further mechanistic investigation revealed that amelioration of lipid metabolism was achieved through the downregulation of lipogenic markers (SREBP-1c, FAS and ACC) and upregulation of a fatty acid oxidation marker (CPT-1). Meanwhile, decrease of inflammatory cytokines (IL-6, TNF-α, and IL-1β) secretion was found with the involvement of the IKKβ/NF-κB signaling pathways. Our findings suggest that Cav-1 is of considerable importance in regulating lipotoxicity-induced β-cell intracellular lipid accumulation and inflammation. (AU)


Asunto(s)
Caveolina 1/deficiencia , Células Secretoras de Insulina , Inflamación , Palmitatos
6.
Int J Technol Assess Health Care ; 40(1): e12, 2024 Feb 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38357734

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To achieve universal health coverage (UHC), countries must make difficult choices to optimize the use of scarce resources. There is a growing interest in using evidence-based priority setting processes, such as Health Technology Assessment (HTA), to inform these decisions. In 2020, the Palestinian Institute of Public Health (PNIPH) and the Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NIPH) initiated a pilot to test the feasibility of coproducing an HTA on breast cancer screening in the West Bank, occupied Palestinian Territory. Additionally, a secondary aim was to test whether using an adaptive HTA (aHTA) approach that searched and transferred published evidence syntheses could increase the speed of HTA production. METHODS: The applied stepwise approach to the HTA is described in detail and can be summarized as defining a core team, topic selection, and prioritization; undertaking the HTA including adaptation using tools from the European Network for HTA (EUnetHTA) and stakeholder engagement; and concluding with dissemination. RESULTS: The aHTA approach was faster but not as quick as anticipated, which is attributed to (i) the lack of availability of local evidence for contextualizing findings and (ii) the necessity to build trust between the team and stakeholders. Some delays followed from the COVID-19 pandemic, which showed the importance of good risk anticipation and mitigation. Lastly, other important lessons included the ability of virtual collaborations, the value of capacity strengthening initiatives within low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and the need for early stakeholder engagement. Overall, the pilot was successfully completed. CONCLUSION: This was the first HTA of its kind produced in Palestine, and despite the challenges, it shows that HTA analysis is feasible in this setting.


Asunto(s)
Árabes , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , Humanos , Estudios de Factibilidad , Pandemias , Medio Oriente
7.
Health Technol Assess ; 28(6): 1-94, 2024 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38329108

RESUMEN

Background: Stepping Stones Triple P is an adapted intervention for parents of young children with developmental disabilities who display behaviours that challenge, aiming at teaching positive parenting techniques and promoting a positive parent-child relationship. Objective: To evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P in reducing behaviours that challenge in children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. Design, setting, participants: A parallel two-arm pragmatic multisite single-blind randomised controlled trial recruited a total of 261 dyads (parent and child). The children were aged 30-59 months and had moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. Participants were randomised, using a 3 : 2 allocation ratio, into the intervention arm (Stepping Stones Triple P; n = 155) or treatment as usual arm (n = 106). Participants were recruited from four study sites in Blackpool, North and South London and Newcastle. Intervention: Level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P consists of six group sessions and three individual phone or face-to-face contacts over 9 weeks. These were changed to remote sessions after 16 March 2020 due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Main outcome measure: The primary outcome measure was the parent-reported Child Behaviour Checklist, which assesses the severity of behaviours that challenge. Results: We found a small non-significant difference in the mean Child Behaviour Checklist scores (-4.23, 95% CI -9.98 to 1.52, p = 0.146) in the intervention arm compared to treatment as usual at 12 months. Per protocol and complier average causal effect sensitivity analyses, which took into consideration the number of sessions attended, showed the Child Behaviour Checklist mean score difference at 12 months was lower in the intervention arm by -10.77 (95% CI -19.12 to -2.42, p = 0.014) and -11.53 (95% CI -26.97 to 3.91, p = 0.143), respectively. The Child Behaviour Checklist mean score difference between participants who were recruited before and after the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic was estimated as -7.12 (95% CI -13.44 to -0.81) and 7.61 (95% CI -5.43 to 20.64), respectively (p = 0.046), suggesting that any effect pre-pandemic may have reversed during the pandemic. There were no differences in all secondary measures. Stepping Stones Triple P is probably value for money to deliver (-£1057.88; 95% CI -£3218.6 to -£46.67), but decisions to roll this out as an alternative to existing parenting interventions or treatment as usual may be dependent on policymaker willingness to invest in early interventions to reduce behaviours that challenge. Parents reported the intervention boosted their confidence and skills, and the group format enabled them to learn from others and benefit from peer support. There were 20 serious adverse events reported during the study, but none were associated with the intervention. Limitations: There were low attendance rates in the Stepping Stones Triple P arm, as well as the coronavirus disease 2019-related challenges with recruitment and delivery of the intervention. Conclusions: Level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P did not reduce early onset behaviours that challenge in very young children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. However, there was an effect on child behaviours for those who received a sufficient dose of the intervention. There is a high probability of Stepping Stones Triple P being at least cost neutral and therefore worth considering as an early therapeutic option given the long-term consequences of behaviours that challenge on people and their social networks. Future work: Further research should investigate the implementation of parenting groups for behaviours that challenge in this population, as well as the optimal mode of delivery to maximise engagement and subsequent outcomes. Study registration: This study is registered as NCT03086876 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03086876?term=Hassiotis±Angela&draw=1&rank=1). Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: HTA 15/162/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 6. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.


Research shows that in children without learning disabilities, parenting groups which support parents to develop skills to manage behaviours that challenge in their child can be helpful. The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence recommended that more research was needed to strengthen the evidence for such interventions for children with moderate to severe learning disability who are more likely to display behaviours that challenge in England. In this study, we tested in real-world conditions a programme called level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P, which has shown positive results in trials outside of the United Kingdom. Trained therapists delivered six groups and three individual sessions over 9 weeks to parents of children aged 30­59 months with moderate to severe learning disabilities. Two hundred and sixty-one parents were allocated to one of two arms by chance (randomisation): one received Stepping Stones Triple P and treatment as usual and the other treatment as usual only. Treatment as usual included support and advice by general practitioners or community child development teams. Our primary outcome was parent-reported child behaviour at 12 months after randomisation. We also collected data on other outcomes and carried out interviews with parents, service managers and therapists to find out their views about Stepping Stones Triple P. We did not find that Stepping Stones Triple P reduces behaviours that challenge in the child more than treatment as usual at 12 months. However, when we looked at people who received more than half of the sessions, there was a larger reduction in behaviours which suggests that Stepping Stones Triple P works for families if they attend the full programme. Stepping Stones Triple P seems to be good value for money, as we found that at 12 months (covering 10 months of costs), the Stepping Stones Triple P cost £1058 less than treatment as usual from a health and social care perspective. As such, Stepping Stones Triple P is fairly cheap to deliver and a suitable early intervention for behaviours that challenge especially because of positive feedback from parents. Throughout the trial, we included a Parent Advisory Group that oversaw study materials, interview topic guides and promotion of the study.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Discapacidad Intelectual , Preescolar , Humanos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Londres , Calidad de Vida , Método Simple Ciego
8.
Cost Eff Resour Alloc ; 22(1): 12, 2024 Feb 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38321468

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence-informed guidance on TISP processes for countries where health technology assessment (HTA) is in a nascent phase. We aimed to explore the range of topic identification, selection and prioritization (TISP) processes and practices for HTA in selected countries and identify aspects relevant to emerging HTA systems. METHODS: This mixed design study included a systematic literature review, an electronic survey, and individual interviews. We conducted a systematic literature review with criteria that were developed a priori to identify countries deemed to have a recently formalized HTA system. Based on the literature review, a twenty-three item online survey was shared with the identified countries, we completed follow-up interviews with ten participants who have experience with HTA. We analyzed documents, survey responses and interview transcripts thematically to identify lessons related to TISP processes and practices. RESULTS: The literature review identified 29 nine candidate countries as having a "potential" recently formalized HTA system. Twenty-one survey responses were analyzed and supplemented with ten individual interviews. We found variation in countries' approaches to TISP - particularly between pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions. Results indicate that TISP is heavily driven by policy makers, expert involvement, and to a lesser extent, relevant stakeholders. The use of horizon-scanning and early warning systems is uncommon. Interviewee participants provided further insight to the survey data, reporting that political awareness and an institutional framework were important to support TISP. TISP can be optimized by stronger national regulations and legislative structures, in addition to education and advocacy about HTA among politicians and decision-makers. In some settings regional networks have been useful, particularly in the development of TISP guidelines and methodologies. Additionally, the technical capacity to conduct TISP, and access to relevant local data were factors limiting TISP in national settings. Increased network collaboration and capacity building were reported as future needs. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides current insights into a topic where there is limited published peer reviewed literature. TISP is an important first step of HTA, and topics should be selected and prioritized based on local need and relevance. The limited capacity for TISP in settings where HTA is emerging may be supported by local and international collaboration to increase capacity and knowledge. To succeed, both TISP and HTA need to be embedded within national health care priority setting and decision-making. More in-depth understanding of where countries are situtated in formalizing the TISP process may help others to overcome factors that facilitate or hinder progress.

9.
Orphanet J Rare Dis ; 19(1): 47, 2024 Feb 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38326894

RESUMEN

Health technology assessment (HTA) decisions for pharmaceuticals are complex and evolving. New rare disease treatments are often approved more quickly through accelerated approval schemes, creating more uncertainties about clinical evidence and budget impact at the time of market entry. The use of real-world evidence (RWE), including early coverage with evidence development, has been suggested as a means to support HTA decisions for rare disease treatments. However, the collection and use of RWE poses substantial challenges. These challenges are compounded when considered in the context of treatments for rare diseases. In this paper, we describe the methodological challenges to developing and using prospective and retrospective RWE for HTA decisions, for rare diseases in particular. We focus attention on key elements of study design and analyses, including patient selection and recruitment, appropriate adjustment for confounding and other sources of bias, outcome selection, and data quality monitoring. We conclude by offering suggestions to help address some of the most vexing challenges. The role of RWE in coverage and pricing determination will grow. It is, therefore, necessary for researchers, manufacturers, HTA agencies, and payers to ensure that rigorous and appropriate scientific principles are followed when using RWE as part of decision-making.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Raras , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Estudios Retrospectivos
10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38329700

RESUMEN

Cost-utility analysis may not be sufficient to support reimbursement decisions when the assessed health intervention requires a large proportion of the healthcare budget or when the monetary healthcare budget is not the only resource constraint. Such cases include joint replacement, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) interventions and settings where all resources are constrained (e.g. post-COVID-19 or in low/middle-income countries). Using literature on health technology assessment, rationing and reimbursement in healthcare, we identified seven alternative frameworks for simultaneous decisions about (dis)investment and proposed modifications to deal with multiple resource constraints. These frameworks comprised constrained optimisation; cost-effectiveness league table; 'step-in-the-right-direction' approach; heuristics based on effective gradients; weighted cost-effectiveness ratios; multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA); and programme budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA). We used numerical examples to demonstrate how five of these alternative frameworks would operate. The modified frameworks we propose could be used in local commissioning and/or health technology assessment to supplement standard cost-utility analysis for interventions that have large budget impact and/or are subject to additional constraints.

11.
Health Technol Assess ; 28(3): 1-120, 2024 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38343036

RESUMEN

Background: Containment (e.g. physical restraint and seclusion) is used frequently in mental health inpatient settings. Containment is associated with serious psychological and physical harms. De-escalation (psychosocial techniques to manage distress without containment) is recommended to manage aggression and other unsafe behaviours, for example self-harm. All National Health Service staff are trained in de-escalation but there is little to no evidence supporting training's effectiveness. Objectives: Objectives were to: (1) qualitatively investigate de-escalation and identify barriers and facilitators to use across the range of adult acute and forensic mental health inpatient settings; (2) co-produce with relevant stakeholders an intervention to enhance de-escalation across these settings; (3) evaluate the intervention's preliminary effect on rates of conflict (e.g. violence, self-harm) and containment (e.g. seclusion and physical restraint) and understand barriers and facilitators to intervention effects. Design: Intervention development informed by Experience-based Co-design and uncontrolled pre and post feasibility evaluation. Systematic reviews and qualitative interviews investigated contextual variation in use and effects of de-escalation. Synthesis of this evidence informed co-design of an intervention to enhance de-escalation. An uncontrolled feasibility trial of the intervention followed. Clinical outcome data were collected over 24 weeks including an 8-week pre-intervention phase, an 8-week embedding and an 8-week post-intervention phase. Setting: Ten inpatient wards (including acute, psychiatric intensive care, low, medium and high secure forensic) in two United Kingdom mental health trusts. Participants: In-patients, clinical staff, managers, carers/relatives and training staff in the target settings. Interventions: Enhancing de-escalation techniques in adult acute and forensic units: Development and evaluation of an evidence-based training intervention (EDITION) interventions included de-escalation training, two novel models of reflective practice, post-incident debriefing and feedback on clinical practice, collaborative prescribing and ward rounds, practice changes around admission, shift handovers and the social and physical environment, and sensory modulation and support planning to reduce patient distress. Main outcome measures: Outcomes measured related to feasibility (recruitment and retention, completion of outcome measures), training outcomes and clinical and safety outcomes. Conflict and containment rates were measured via the Patient-Staff Conflict Checklist. Clinical outcomes were measured using the Attitudes to Containment Measures Questionnaire, Attitudes to Personality Disorder Questionnaire, Violence Prevention Climate Scale, Capabilities, Opportunities, and Motivation Scale, Coercion Experience Scale and Perceived Expressed Emotion in Staff Scale. Results: Completion rates of the proposed primary outcome were very good at 68% overall (excluding remote data collection), which increased to 76% (excluding remote data collection) in the post-intervention period. Secondary outcomes had high completion rates for both staff and patient respondents. Regression analyses indicated that reductions in conflict and containment were both predicted by study phase (pre, embedding, post intervention). There were no adverse events or serious adverse events related to the intervention. Conclusions: Intervention and data-collection procedures were feasible, and there was a signal of an effect on the proposed primary outcome. Limitations: Uncontrolled design and self-selecting sample. Future work: Definitive trial determining intervention effects. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN12826685 (closed to recruitment). Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/101/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 3. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information. Context: Conflict (a term used to describe a range of potentially unsafe events including violence, self-harm, rule-breaking, medication refusal, illicit drug and alcohol use and absconding) in mental health settings causes serious physical and psychological harm. Containment interventions which are intended to minimise harm from violence (and other conflict behaviours) such as restraint, seclusion and rapid tranquilisation can result in serious injuries to patients and, occasionally, death. Involvement in physical restraint is the most common cause of serious physical injury to National Health Service mental health staff in the United Kingdom. Violence to staff results in substantial costs to the health service in sickness and litigation payments. Containment interventions are also expensive (e.g. physical restraint costs mental health services £6.1 million and enhanced observations £88 million per annum). Despite these harms, recent findings indicate containment interventions such as seclusion and physical restraint continue to be used frequently in mental health settings. Clinical trials have demonstrated that interventions can reduce containment without increasing violence and other conflict behaviours (e.g. verbal aggression, self-harm). Substantial cost-savings result from reducing containment use. De-escalation, as an intervention to manage aggression and potential violence without restrictive practices, is a core intervention. 'De-escalation' is a collective term for a range of psychosocial techniques designed to reduce distress and anger without the need to use 'containment' interventions (measures to prevent harm through restricting a person's ability to act independently, such as physical restraint and seclusion). Evidence indicates that de-escalation involves ensuring conditions for safe intervention and effective communication are established, clarifying and attempting to resolve the patient's concern, conveyance of respect and empathy and regulating unhelpful emotions such as anxiety and anger. Despite featuring prominently in clinical guidelines and training policy domestically and internationally and being a component of mandatory National Health Service training, there is no evidence-based model on which to base training. A systematic review of de-escalation training effectiveness and acceptability conducted in 2015 concluded: (1) no model of training has demonstrated effectiveness in a sufficiently rigorous evaluation, (2) the theoretical underpinning of evaluated models was often unclear and (3) there has been inadequate investigation of the characteristics of training likely to enhance acceptability and uptake. Despite all National Health Service staff being trained in de-escalation there have been no high-quality trials evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of training. Feasibility studies are needed to establish whether it is possible to conduct a definitive trial that can determine the clinical, safety and cost-effectiveness of this intervention.


Mental health hospitals are stressful places for patients and staff. Patients are often detained against their will, in places that are noisy, unfamiliar and frightening. Violence and self-injury happen quite frequently. Sometimes staff physically restrain patients or isolate patients in locked rooms (called seclusion). While these measures might sometimes be necessary to maintain safety, they are psychologically and physically harmful. To help reduce the use of these unsafe measures, staff are trained in communication skills designed to reduce anger and distress without using physical force. Professionals call these skills 'de-escalation'. Although training in de-escalation is mandatory, there is no good evidence to say whether it works or not, or what specific techniques staff should be trained in. The Enhancing de-escalation techniques in adult acute and forensic units: Development and evaluation of an evidence-based training intervention (EDITION) project aimed to develop and evaluate a de-escalation training programme informed by research evidence. We interviewed over one hundred people who either worked in or received treatment in a mental health hospital. These people were clear that the training should target key sources of interpersonal and environmental stress that prevent de-escalation from working. We also reviewed all the scientific studies on de-escalation and training, aiming to identify the elements of training that are most likely to increase use of de-escalation. Then, in partnership with current mental health service users and clinical staff, we developed the training programme. Training was delivered to more than 270 staff working in 10 different wards in mental health hospitals. We measured rates of violence, self-injury and use of physical restraint and seclusion 8 weeks before staff received training and 16 weeks after they received training (24 weeks of data collection in total). Analysis of these data showed that these unsafe events were occurring significantly less frequently after training than they were before training, which raised the possibility that the training was helping to reduce harm.


Asunto(s)
Agresión , Medicina Estatal , Adulto , Humanos , Estudios de Factibilidad , Reino Unido , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
12.
Health Technol Assess ; 28(4): 1-113, 2024 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38343072

RESUMEN

Background: Atopic dermatitis is a chronic relapsing inflammatory skin condition. One of the most common skin disorders in children, atopic dermatitis typically manifests before the age of 5 years, but it can develop at any age. Atopic dermatitis is characterised by dry, inflamed skin accompanied by intense itchiness (pruritus). Objectives: To appraise the clinical and cost effectiveness of abrocitinib, tralokinumab and upadacitinib within their marketing authorisations as alternative therapies for treating moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis compared to systemic immunosuppressants (first-line ciclosporin A or second-line dupilumab and baricitinib). Data sources: Studies were identified from an existing systematic review (search date 2019) and update searches of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL) to November 2021, from bibliographies of retrieved studies, clinical trial registers and evidence provided by the sponsoring companies of the treatments under review. Methods: A systematic review of the clinical effectiveness literature was carried out and a network meta-analysis undertaken for adults and adolescents at different steps of the treatment pathway. The primary outcome of interest was a combined response of Eczema Area and Severity Index 50 + Dermatology Life Quality Index ≥ 4; where this was consistently unavailable for a step in the pathway, an analysis of Eczema Area and Severity Index 75 was conducted. A de novo economic model was developed to assess cost effectiveness from the perspective of the National Health Service in England. The model structure was informed through systematic review of the economic literature and by consulting clinical experts. Effectiveness data were obtained from the network meta-analysis. Costs and utilities were obtained from the evidence provided by sponsoring companies and standard UK sources. Results: Network meta-analyses indicate that abrocitinib 200 mg and upadacitinib 30 mg may be more effective, and tralokinumab may be less effective than dupilumab and baricitinib as second-line systemic therapies. Abrocitinib 100 mg and upadacitinib 15 mg have a more similar effectiveness to dupilumab. Upadacitinib 30 and 15 mg are likely to be more effective than ciclosporin A as a first-line therapy. Upadacitinib 15 mg, abrocitinib 200 and 100 mg may be more effective than dupilumab in adolescents. The cost effectiveness of abrocitinib and upadacitinib for both doses is dependent on the subgroup of interest. Tralokinumab can be considered cost-effective as a second-line systemic therapy owing to greater cost savings per quality-adjusted life-year lost. Conclusions: The primary strength of the analysis of the three new drugs compared with current practice for each of the subpopulations is the consistent approach to the assessment of clinical and cost effectiveness. However, the conclusions are limited by the high uncertainty around the clinical effectiveness and lack of data for the primary outcome for comparisons with baricitinib and for the adolescent and adult first-line populations. Future work and limitations: The most significant limitation that Eczema Area and Severity Index 50 + Dermatology Life Quality Index ≥ 4 could not be obtained for the adolescent and adult first-line systemic treatment populations is due to a paucity of data for dupilumab and ciclosporin A. A comparison of the new drugs against one another in addition to current practice would be beneficial to provide a robust view on which treatments are the most cost-effective. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021266219. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme (NIHR award ref: 135138) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 4. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.


Atopic dermatitis is one of the most common skin conditions in children but can also develop in adulthood. People with atopic dermatitis have dry, red (inflamed) skin that is also extremely itchy (pruritus). There is no cure for atopic dermatitis. Therapy starts with topical treatments that are applied to the skin, such as emollients. Severe forms of atopic dermatitis are often treated with systemic treatments, which are drugs that are provided as tablets or an injection. Ciclosporin A is often the first systemic therapy given. If atopic dermatitis does not get better with ciclosporin A, options available in the National Health Service are dupilumab and baricitinib. New therapies that have been evaluated in clinical trials for atopic dermatitis but have not been assessed for use in the National Health Service are abrocitinib, tralokinumab and upadacitinib. The aim of this project is to review the medical benefits, risks and value for money for the National Health Service of abrocitinib, tralokinumab and upadacitinib for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in a multiple technology appraisal. Our review found that: For children aged between 12 and 18 years, abrocitinib and a low dose of upadacitinib (15 mg) are good value for money for the National Health Service. For adults who need a first systemic treatment, upadacitinib is unlikely to be good value for money for the National Health Service. For adults who are still suffering from their atopic dermatitis after having a systemic treatment and need a different drug, upadacitinib 15 mg and tralokinumab could be good value for money for the National Health Service if they are used on their own. For adults who are still suffering from their atopic dermatitis after having a systemic treatment and need a different drug, but need to take it with steroid cream, abrocitinib 100 mg, upadacitinib 15 mg and tralokinumab could all be good value for money for the National Health Service.


Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales , Azetidinas , Dermatitis Atópica , Eccema , Compuestos Heterocíclicos con 3 Anillos , Purinas , Pirazoles , Pirimidinas , Sulfonamidas , Niño , Adulto , Adolescente , Humanos , Preescolar , Dermatitis Atópica/tratamiento farmacológico , Ciclosporina/uso terapéutico , Medicina Estatal , Resultado del Tratamiento , Análisis Costo-Beneficio
13.
Health Technol Assess ; 28(5): 1-266, 2024 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38343084

RESUMEN

Background: Up to 30% of children have constipation at some stage in their life. Although often short-lived, in one-third of children it progresses to chronic functional constipation, potentially with overflow incontinence. Optimal management strategies remain unclear. Objective: To determine the most effective interventions, and combinations and sequences of interventions, for childhood chronic functional constipation, and understand how they can best be implemented. Methods: Key stakeholders, comprising two parents of children with chronic functional constipation, two adults who experienced childhood chronic functional constipation and four health professional/continence experts, contributed throughout the research. We conducted pragmatic mixed-method reviews. For all reviews, included studies focused on any interventions/strategies, delivered in any setting, to improve any outcomes in children (0-18 years) with a clinical diagnosis of chronic functional constipation (excluding studies of diagnosis/assessment) included. Dual reviewers applied inclusion criteria and assessed risk of bias. One reviewer extracted data, checked by a second reviewer. Scoping review: We systematically searched electronic databases (including Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) (January 2011 to March 2020) and grey literature, including studies (any design) reporting any intervention/strategy. Data were coded, tabulated and mapped. Research quality was not evaluated. Systematic reviews of the evidence of effectiveness: For each different intervention, we included existing systematic reviews judged to be low risk of bias (using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews), updating any meta-analyses with new randomised controlled trials. Where there was no existing low risk of bias systematic reviews, we included randomised controlled trials and other primary studies. The risk of bias was judged using design-specific tools. Evidence was synthesised narratively, and a process of considered judgement was used to judge certainty in the evidence as high, moderate, low, very low or insufficient evidence. Economic synthesis: Included studies (any design, English-language) detailed intervention-related costs. Studies were categorised as cost-consequence, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility or cost-benefit, and reporting quality evaluated using the consensus health economic criteria checklist. Systematic review of implementation factors: Included studies reported data relating to implementation barriers or facilitators. Using a best-fit framework synthesis approach, factors were synthesised around the consolidated framework for implementation research domains. Results: Stakeholders prioritised outcomes, developed a model which informed evidence synthesis and identified evidence gaps. Scoping review: 651 studies, including 190 randomised controlled trials and 236 primary studies, conservatively reported 48 interventions/intervention combinations. Effectiveness systematic reviews: studies explored service delivery models (n = 15); interventions delivered by families/carers (n = 32), wider children's workforce (n = 21), continence teams (n = 31) and specialist consultant-led teams (n = 42); complementary therapies (n = 15); and psychosocial interventions (n = 4). One intervention (probiotics) had moderate-quality evidence; all others had low to very-low-quality evidence. Thirty-one studies reported evidence relating to cost or resource use; data were insufficient to support generalisable conclusions. One hundred and six studies described implementation barriers and facilitators. Conclusions: Management of childhood chronic functional constipation is complex. The available evidence remains limited, with small, poorly conducted and reported studies. Many evidence gaps were identified. Treatment recommendations within current clinical guidelines remain largely unchanged, but there is a need for research to move away from considering effectiveness of single interventions. Clinical care and future studies must consider the individual characteristics of children. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019159008. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 128470) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 5. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.


Between 5% and 30% of children experience constipation at some stage. In one-third of these children, this progresses to chronic functional constipation. Chronic functional constipation affects more children with additional needs. We aimed to find and bring together published information about treatments for chronic functional constipation, to help establish best treatments and treatment combinations. We did not cover assessment or diagnosis of chronic functional constipation. This project was guided by a 'stakeholder group', including parents of children with constipation, people who experienced constipation as children, and healthcare professionals/continence experts. We carried out a 'scoping review' and a series of 'systematic reviews'. Our 'scoping review' provides an overall picture of research about treatments, with 651 studies describing 48 treatments. This helps identify important evidence gaps. 'Systematic reviews' are robust methods of bringing together and interpreting research evidence. Our stakeholder group decided to structure our systematic reviews to reflect who delivered the interventions. We brought together evidence about how well treatments worked when delivered by families/carers (32 studies), the wider children's workforce (e.g. general practitioner, health visitor) (21 studies), continence teams (31 studies) or specialist consultant-led teams (42 studies). We also considered complementary therapies (15 studies) and behavioural strategies (4 studies). Care is affected by what is done and how it is done. We brought together evidence about different models of delivering care (15 studies), barriers and facilitators to implementation of treatments (106 studies) and costs (31 studies). Quality of evidence was mainly low to very low. Despite numerous studies, there was often insufficient information to support generalisable conclusions. Our findings generally agreed with current clinical guidelines. Management of childhood chronic functional constipation should be child-centred, multifaceted and adapted according to the individual child, their needs, the situation in which they live and the health-care setting in which they are looked after. Research is needed to address our identified evidence gaps.


Asunto(s)
Estreñimiento , Personal de Salud , Niño , Adulto , Humanos , Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto , Estreñimiento/terapia
14.
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser ; 24(2): 1-162, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38344326

RESUMEN

Background: Pain is a common and very distressing symptom for adults and children with cancer. Compared with other routes of delivery, infusing pain medication directly into the intrathecal space around the spinal cord may reduce the incidence of systemic side effects and allow for more rapid and effective pain relief. We conducted a health technology assessment of intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDSs) for adults and children with cancer pain, which included an evaluation of effectiveness, safety, cost-effectiveness, the budget impact of publicly funding IDDSs, patient preferences and values, and ethical considerations. Methods: We performed a systematic literature search of the clinical evidence to retrieve systematic reviews, and we selected and reported results from 2 recent reviews that were relevant to our research questions. We complemented the chosen systematic reviews with a literature search to identify primary studies published after December 2020. We used the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) tool to assess the risk of bias of each included systematic review. We assessed the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We performed a systematic economic literature search and conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing IDDSs with standard care (i.e., non-IDDS methods of pain management) from a public payer perspective. We also analyzed the budget impact of publicly funding IDDSs in Ontario. To contextualize the potential value of IDDSs, we spoke with patients with cancer pain and with caregivers of patients with cancer pain. We explored ethical considerations from a review of published literature on the use of IDDSs for the management of cancer pain in adults and children as well as a review of the other components of this health technology assessment to identify ethical considerations relevant to the Ontario context. Results: We included 2 systematic reviews (1 on adults and 1 on children) in the clinical evidence review. In adults with cancer pain who have a life expectancy greater than 6 months, intrathecal drug delivery was associated with a significant reduction in pain intensity compared with before implantation up to a 1-year follow-up (GRADE: Moderate to Low). Improved pain management appeared to be maintained beyond a 4-week follow-up. IDDSs likely decrease the use of systemic opioids (GRADE: Moderate to Low). They may also improve health-related quality of life (GRADE: Low), functional outcomes (GRADE: Low), and survival (GRADE: Low to Very low). In children with cancer pain, IDDSs may reduce pain intensity, improve functional outcomes, and improve survival, but the evidence is very uncertain (all GRADEs: Very low). IDDS implantation carries certain rare risks related to mechanical errors, drug-related side effects, and surgical complications. There are inherent limitations in conducting research in patients with refractory cancer pain; therefore, it is unlikely that higher-quality evidence will emerge in the next few years. Our primary economic evaluation found that IDDSs are more effective and more costly than standard care. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of IDDSs compared with standard care is $57,314 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The probability of IDDSs being cost-effective versus standard care is 43.46% at a willingness-to-pay of $50,000 per QALY gained and 72.54% at a willingness-to-pay of $100,000 per QALY gained. Publicly funding IDDSs in Ontario would cost an additional $0.27 million per year, for a total of $1.34 million over the next 5 years. The patients with cancer pain and caregivers with whom we spoke described the debilitating nature of cancer pain and the difficulty of finding effective pain management options. Patients with experience of an IDDS spoke of its effectiveness and its positive impact on their quality of life and mental health. Implementing IDDSs for patients with cancer pain raises several ethical and equity considerations related to the experiences and management of cancer pain, how limitations in evidence may entail uncertainties in clinical and health system decision-making, as well as clinical, geographic, and health system access barriers. Conclusions: Intrathecal drug delivery likely reduces pain intensity and decreases the use of systemic opioids in adults with cancer pain who have a life expectancy greater than 6 months. It may also improve health-related quality of life, functional outcomes, and survival, although the evidence for survival is very uncertain. The clinical evidence in children with cancer pain is very uncertain. IDDS implantation is reasonably safe. Intrathecal drug delivery is more effective and more costly than standard care. We estimate that funding IDDSs in Ontario will result in additional costs of $0.27 million per year, for a total of $1.34 million over the next 5 years. Considerations related to funding and implementing IDDSs for patients with cancer pain in Ontario will require explicit and focused attention to considerations of equity and access in the diagnosis and management of cancer pain and in the use, clinical uptake, and delivery of IDDS pain management.


Asunto(s)
Dolor en Cáncer , Neoplasias , Adulto , Niño , Humanos , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/métodos , Dolor en Cáncer/tratamiento farmacológico , Calidad de Vida , Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Dolor/tratamiento farmacológico , Dolor/etiología , Sistemas de Liberación de Medicamentos , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico
15.
Radiol Imaging Cancer ; 6(2): e230086, 2024 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38305716

RESUMEN

Purpose To evaluate the use of ChatGPT as a tool to simplify answers to common questions about breast cancer prevention and screening. Materials and Methods In this retrospective, exploratory study, ChatGPT was requested to simplify responses to 25 questions about breast cancer to a sixth-grade reading level in March and August 2023. Simplified responses were evaluated for clinical appropriateness. All original and simplified responses were assessed for reading ease on the Flesch Reading Ease Index and for readability on five scales: Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Gunning Fog Index, Coleman-Liau Index, Automated Readability Index, and the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (ie, SMOG) Index. Mean reading ease, readability, and word count were compared between original and simplified responses using paired t tests. McNemar test was used to compare the proportion of responses with adequate reading ease (score of 60 or greater) and readability (sixth-grade level). Results ChatGPT improved mean reading ease (original responses, 46 vs simplified responses, 70; P < .001) and readability (original, grade 13 vs simplified, grade 8.9; P < .001) and decreased word count (original, 193 vs simplified, 173; P < .001). Ninety-two percent (23 of 25) of simplified responses were considered clinically appropriate. All 25 (100%) simplified responses met criteria for adequate reading ease, compared with only two of 25 original responses (P < .001). Two of the 25 simplified responses (8%) met criteria for adequate readability. Conclusion ChatGPT simplified answers to common breast cancer screening and prevention questions by improving the readability by four grade levels, though the potential to produce incorrect information necessitates physician oversight when using this tool. Keywords: Mammography, Screening, Informatics, Breast, Education, Health Policy and Practice, Oncology, Technology Assessment Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2023.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Alfabetización en Salud , Humanos , Femenino , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/prevención & control , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Estudios Retrospectivos , Atención Dirigida al Paciente
16.
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser ; 24(1): 1-151, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38332948

RESUMEN

Background: Glaucoma is the term for a group of eye disorders that causes progressive damage to the optic nerve, which can lead to visual impairment and, potentially, irreversible blindness. Minimally invasive bleb surgery (MIBS) reduces eye pressure through the implantation of a device that creates a new subconjunctival outflow pathway for eye fluid drainage. MIBS is a less invasive alternative to conventional/incisional glaucoma surgery (e.g., trabeculectomy). We conducted a health technology assessment of MIBS for people with glaucoma, which included an evaluation of effectiveness, safety, the budget impact of publicly funding MIBS, and patient preferences and values. Methods: We performed a systematic literature search of the clinical evidence. We assessed the risk of bias of each included study using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 1.0 tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Risk of Bias Assessment tool for Nonrandomized Studies (RoBANS) for comparative observational studies, and the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We conducted an economic literature search and we estimated the budget impact of publicly funding MIBS in Ontario. We did not conduct a primary economic evaluation due to the limited long-term effectiveness data. We summarized the preferences and values evidence from previous health technology assessments to understand the perspectives and experiences of patients with glaucoma. Results: We included 41 studies (2 RCTs and 39 comparative observational studies) in the clinical evidence review. MIBS may reduce intraocular pressure and the number of medications used, but we are uncertain if MIBS results in outcomes similar to trabeculectomy (GRADE: Moderate to Very low). Compared with trabeculectomy, MIBS may result in fewer follow-up visits and interventions, and adverse events (GRADE: Moderate to Very Low). MIBS may also reduce intraocular pressure and the number of antiglaucoma medications used, compared with other glaucoma treatments, but the evidence is uncertain (GRADE: Very low). Our economic evidence review identified two directly applicable studies. The results of these studies indicate that the cost-effectiveness of MIBS is highly uncertain, and the cost of glaucoma interventions are likely to vary across provinces. The annual budget impact of publicly funding MIBS in Ontario ranged from $0.11 million in year 1 to $0.67 million in year 5, for a total 5-year budget impact estimate of $1.93 million. Preferences and values evidence suggests that fear of ultimate blindness and difficulty managing medication for glaucoma led patients to explore other treatment options such as MIBS. Glaucoma patients found minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) procedure beneficial, with minimal side effects and recovery time. Conclusions: Minimally invasive bleb surgery reduces intraocular eye pressure and the number of antiglaucoma medications needed, but we are uncertain if the outcomes are similar to trabeculectomy (GRADE: Moderate to Very low). However, MIBS may be safer than trabeculectomy (GRADE: Moderate to Very low) and result in fewer follow-ups (GRADE: Moderate to Very low). MIBS may also improve glaucoma symptoms compared with other glaucoma treatments, but the evidence is very uncertain (GRADE: Very low).We estimate that publicly funding MIBS would result in an additional cost of $1.93 million over 5 years. Patients who underwent MIGS procedures found them to be generally successful and beneficial, with minimal side effects and recovery time. We could not draw conclusions about specific MIBS procedures or long-term outcomes.


Asunto(s)
Glaucoma , Trabeculectomía , Humanos , Agentes Antiglaucoma , Ceguera/cirugía , Glaucoma/cirugía , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/métodos , Trabeculectomía/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto
17.
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res ; 16: 69-80, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38352115

RESUMEN

Background: The prevention of myelomeningocele (MMC) and meningocele (MC) is a public health concern. A systematic review on economic factors associated with MMC and MC can help the policy makers to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of screening and treatment. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review to provide up-to date pharmacoeconomic evidence of all economic studies present in literature on different aspects of MMC and MC. Methods: We searched in the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHSEED), PubMed, Cost-effectiveness Analysis Registry (CEA Registry), Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), Health Technology Assessment Database (HTAD), Cochrane Library, and Econlit. The PRISMA guidelines were followed in the search and evaluation of literature. Only articles in English not limited by the year of publication that fulfilled the eligibility criteria were included in this systematic review. Results: Nineteen papers were included in the study. The studies were very heterogeneous and reported a comparison of the costs between prenatal versus postnatal repair, the cost of fetoscopic approach versus open surgery, the cost of ventriculoperitoneal shunting (VPS) versus endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV), and ETV with choroid plexus cauterization (ETV/CPC), the cost of hospitalization, and the cost of diagnosis for MMC. Conclusion: The results of this study can help in implementing new policies in different countries to assist MC and MMC patients with the cost of treatment and screening.

18.
BMJ Open ; 14(2): e075173, 2024 Feb 13.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38355183

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to identify existing appraisal tools for non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) and to compare the criteria that the tools provide at the quality-item level. DESIGN: Literature review through three approaches: systematic search of journal articles, snowballing search of reviews on appraisal tools and grey literature search on websites of health technology assessment (HTA) agencies. DATA SOURCES: Systematic search: Medline; Snowballing: starting from three articles (D'Andrea et al, Quigley et al and Faria et al); Grey literature: websites of European HTA agencies listed by the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment. Appraisal tools were searched through April 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We included a tool, if it addressed quality concerns of NRSIs and was published in English (unless from grey literature). A tool was excluded, if it was only for diagnostic, prognostic, qualitative or secondary studies. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent researchers searched, screened and reviewed all included studies and tools, summarised quality items and scored whether and to what extent a quality item was described by a tool, for either methodological quality or reporting. RESULTS: Forty-nine tools met inclusion criteria and were included for the content analysis. Concerns regarding the quality of NRSI were categorised into 4 domains and 26 items. The Research Triangle Institute Item Bank (RTI Item Bank) and STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) were the most comprehensive tools for methodological quality and reporting, respectively, as they addressed (n=20; 17) and sufficiently described (n=18; 13) the highest number of items. However, none of the tools covered all items. CONCLUSION: Most of the tools have their own strengths, but none of them could address all quality concerns relevant to NRSIs. Even the most comprehensive tools can be complemented by several items. We suggest decision-makers, researchers and tool developers consider the quality-item level heterogeneity, when selecting a tool or identifying a research gap. OSF REGISTRATION NUMBER: OSF registration DOI (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/KCSGX).

19.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy ; 22(2): 131-144, 2024 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38316713

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To develop preliminary good practice recommendations for synthesising and linking evidence of treatment effectiveness when modelling the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tests. METHODS: We conducted a targeted review of guidance from key Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies to summarise current recommendations on synthesis and linkage of treatment effectiveness evidence within economic evaluations of diagnostic tests. We then focused on a specific case study, the cost-effectiveness of troponin for the diagnosis of myocardial infarction, and reviewed the approach taken to synthesise and link treatment effectiveness evidence in different modelling studies. RESULTS: The Australian and UK HTA bodies provided advice for synthesising and linking treatment effectiveness in diagnostic models, acknowledging that linking test results to treatment options and their outcomes is common. Across all reviewed models for the case study, uniform test-directed treatment decision making was assumed, i.e., all those who tested positive were treated. Treatment outcome data from a variety of sources, including expert opinion, were utilised for linked clinical outcomes. Preliminary good practice recommendations for data identification, integration and description are proposed. CONCLUSION: Modelling the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tests poses unique challenges in linking evidence on test accuracy to treatment effectiveness data to understand how a test impacts patient outcomes and costs. Upfront consideration of how a test and its results will likely be incorporated into patient diagnostic pathways is key to exploring the optimal design of such models. We propose some preliminary good practice recommendations to improve the quality of cost-effectiveness evaluations of diagnostics tests going forward.


Asunto(s)
Pruebas Diagnósticas de Rutina , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , Humanos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Australia
20.
BMJ Open ; 14(2): e074341, 2024 Feb 13.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38351112

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) pioneered the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) processes and methodologies. Technology appraisals (TAs) focus on pharmaceutical products and clinical and economic data, which are presented by the product manufacturers to the NICE appraisal committee for decision-making. Uncertainty in data reduces the chance of a positive outcome from the HTA process or requires a higher discount. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the quality of clinical data (comparator, quality of life (QoL), randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and overall quality of evidence) submitted by the manufacturers to NICE. DESIGN: This retrospective evaluation analysed active TAs published between 2000 and 2019 (up to TA600). METHODS: For all TAs, we extracted data from the Assessment Group and Evidence Review Group reports and Final Appraisal Determinations on (1) the quality of submitted RCTs and (2) the overall quality of evidence submitted for decision-making. For single TAs, we also extracted data and its critique on QoL and comparators. Each category was scored for quality and analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: 409 TAs were analysed (multiple technology appraisals (MTA)=104, single technology appraisal (STA)=305). In two-thirds of TAs, the overall quality of evidence was either poor (n=224, 55%) or unacceptable (n=41, 10%). In 39% (n=119) of the STAs, the quality of comparative evidence was considered poor, and in 17% (n=51) unacceptable. In 44% (n=135) of STAs, the quality of QoL data was considered poor, 15% (n=47) unacceptable, 33% (n=102) acceptable and 7% (n=21) as good. Over 20 years of longitudinal analysis did not show improvements in the quality of evidence submitted to NICE. CONCLUSION: We found that the primary components of clinical evidence influencing NICE's decision-making framework were of poor quality. It is essential to continue to generate robust clinical data for premarket and postmarket introduction of medicines into clinical practice to ensure they deliver benefits to patients.


Asunto(s)
Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , Humanos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Incertidumbre
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...