Effectiveness of iodine-impregnated incise drapes for preventing surgical site infection in patients with clean or clean contaminated wounds: A systematic literature review and cost-consequence analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection is a serious complication associated with significant morbidity, mortality and health care expenditure. AIMS: To determine the clinical effectiveness and economic impact of using iodine-impregnated incise drapes for preventing surgical site infection. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and CINAHL databases were systematically searched. Critical appraisal and synthesis of clinical evidence informed a decision analytical cost-consequence model. FINDINGS: Nine studies were included in the systematic literature review. Evidence from cardiac surgery patients was considered appropriate to inform the cost analysis. The economic model evaluation estimated cost savings of £549 per patient with the iodophor-impregnated drape in the deterministic analysis and a mean cost saving per patient of £554,172 per 1000 in the probabilistic analysis. CONCLUSION: Using iodine-impregnated drapes in cardiac surgery patients may effectively reduce infections and provide cost-savings, but further research is required.

Systematic review of time lag between antibiotic use and rise of resistant pathogens among hospitalized adults in Europe.

Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) causes substantial health and economic burden to individuals, healthcare systems and societies globally. Understanding the temporal relationship between antibiotic consumption and antibiotic resistance in hospitalized patients can better inform antibiotic stewardship activities and the time frame for their evaluation. Objectives: This systematic review examined the temporal relationship between antibiotic use and development of antibiotic resistance for 42 pre-defined antibiotic and pathogen combinations in hospitalized adults in Europe. Methods: Searches in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and NIHR Centre for Reviews and Dissemination were undertaken from 2000 to August 2021. Pathogens of interest were Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecium, CoNS, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii complex. Results: Twenty-eight ecological studies and one individual-level study were included. Ecological studies were predominantly retrospective in design (19 studies) and of reasonable (20 studies) to high (8 studies) methodological quality. Of the eight pathogens of interest, no relevant data were identified for S. pneumoniae and CoNS. Across all pathogens, the time-lag data from the 28 ecological studies showed a similar pattern, with the majority of studies reporting lags ranging from 0 to 6 months. Conclusions: Development of antibiotic resistance for the investigated antibiotic/pathogen combinations tends to occur over 0 to 6 months following exposure within European hospitals. This information could inform planning of antibiotic stewardship activities in hospital settings.

The relationship between chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus and health-related quality of life: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus (CKD-aP) is a common and burdensome condition for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients, especially those receiving haemodialysis. High-quality evidence of the relationship between CKD-aP and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) can therefore inform clinicians and policymakers about treatment choice and reimbursement decisions. METHODS: A systematic literature review and narrative synthesis stratified by study design and HRQoL instrument was conducted to evaluate in adult ESKD patients receiving in-centre haemodialysis the relationship between CKD-aP and HRQoL assessed using multi dimensional generic or condition-specific preference- or non-preference-based measures. MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, BIOSIS Citation Index, Cochrane Library and PsycINFO from inception to March 2020 were searched, with two reviewers extracting data independently. RESULTS: Searches identified 2684 unique records, of which 20 papers relating to 18 unique studies [5 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 13 observational studies] were included. HRQoL was assessed using four generic and eight disease-specific measures. The impact of CKD-aP was assessed by comparison of means, linear regression and correlation. Observational studies employing comprehensively adjusted multivariable linear regression largely found associations between CKD-aP severities and HRQoL. Analyses suggest this relationship is partially mediated by the sleep disturbance caused by CKD-aP. RCTs showing improvements in CKD-aP severity were associated with clinically meaningful improvements in HRQoL. Compared with generic measures, disease-specific HRQoL instruments reported greater changes with reduced CKD-aP. Heterogeneity in study design and reporting precluded meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: CKD-aP severity was found to be associated with a worsening of HRQoL in the majority of observational and RCT studies. Parallel improvements in CKD-aP and HRQoL with interventions may support their use (PROSPERO registration 175035).

Intravitreal ranibizumab versus aflibercept versus bevacizumab for macular oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion: the LEAVO non-inferiority three-arm RCT.

BACKGROUND: Licensed ranibizumab (0.5 mg/0.05 ml Lucentis®; Novartis International AG, Basel, Switzerland) and aflibercept (2 mg/0.05 ml Eylea®; Bayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany) and unlicensed bevacizumab (1.25 mg/0.05 ml Avastin®; F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG, Basel, Switzerland) are used to treat macula oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion, but their relative clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and impact on the UK NHS and Personal Social Services have never been directly compared over the typical disease treatment period. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of three intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor agents for the management of macula oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion. DESIGN: This was a three-arm, double-masked, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. SETTING: The trial was set in 44 UK NHS ophthalmology departments, between 2014 and 2018. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 463 patients with visual impairment due to macula oedema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion were included in the trial. INTERVENTIONS: The participants were treated with repeated intravitreal injections of ranibizumab (n = 155), aflibercept (n = 154) or bevacizumab (n = 154). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was an increase in the best corrected visual acuity letter score from baseline to 100 weeks in the trial eye. The null hypothesis that aflibercept and bevacizumab are each inferior to ranibizumab was tested with a non-inferiority margin of -5 visual acuity letters over 100 weeks. Secondary outcomes included additional visual acuity, and imaging outcomes, Visual Function Questionnaire-25, EuroQol-5 Dimensions with and without a vision bolt-on, and drug side effects. Cost-effectiveness was estimated using treatment costs and Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index to measure quality-adjusted life-years. RESULTS: The adjusted mean changes at 100 weeks in the best corrected visual acuity letter scores were as follows - ranibizumab, 12.5 letters (standard deviation 21.1 letters); aflibercept, 15.1 letters (standard deviation 18.7 letters); and bevacizumab, 9.8 letters (standard deviation 21.4 letters). Aflibercept was non-inferior to ranibizumab in the intention-to-treat population (adjusted mean best corrected visual acuity difference 2.23 letters, 95% confidence interval -2.17 to 6.63 letters; p = 0.0006), but not superior. The study was unable to demonstrate that bevacizumab was non-inferior to ranibizumab in the intention-to-treat population (adjusted mean best corrected visual acuity difference -1.73 letters, 95% confidence interval -6.12 to 2.67 letters; p = 0.071). A post hoc analysis was unable to demonstrate that bevacizumab was non-inferior to aflibercept in the intention-to-treat population (adjusted mean best corrected visual acuity difference was -3.96 letters, 95% confidence interval -8.34 to 0.42 letters; p = 0.32). All per-protocol population results were the same. Fewer injections were required with aflibercept (10.0) than with ranibizumab (11.8) (difference in means -1.8, 95% confidence interval -2.9 to -0.8). A post hoc analysis showed that more bevacizumab than aflibercept injections were required (difference in means 1.6, 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 2.7). There were no new safety concerns. The model- and trial-based cost-effectiveness analyses estimated that bevacizumab was the most cost-effective treatment at a threshold of £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. LIMITATIONS: The comparison of aflibercept and bevacizumab was a post hoc analysis. CONCLUSION: The study showed aflibercept to be non-inferior to ranibizumab. However, the possibility that bevacizumab is worse than ranibizumab and aflibercept by 5 visual acuity letters cannot be ruled out. Bevacizumab is an economically attractive treatment alternative and would lead to substantial cost savings to the NHS and other health-care systems. However, uncertainty about its relative effectiveness should be discussed comprehensively with patients, their representatives and funders before treatment is considered. FUTURE WORK: To obtain extensive patient feedback and discuss with all stakeholders future bevacizumab NHS use. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13623634. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The eye functions like a camera. The retina, at the back of the eye, is the camera film, and the centre, the macula, allows us to see fine details. Approximately 6500 people each year in England and Wales are affected by fluid leaking out of congested tiny blood vessels, causing macular swelling or oedema. The cause is blockage of the main vein that normally drains blood from the retina. Three drugs, injected into the eye in tiny amounts every 4­8 weeks, have been shown to improve the vision of people with this condition. Two drugs, ranibizumab (0.5 mg/0.05 ml Lucentis^®; Novartis International AG, Basel, Switzerland) and aflibercept (2 mg/0.05 ml Eylea^®; Bayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany), are licensed for UK use, but the third, bevacizumab (1.25 mg/0.05 ml Avastin^®; F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG, Basel, Switzerland), is not, even though it is much cheaper and used extensively worldwide. To our knowledge, no trials have compared the three drugs over the typical 2-year treatment period. This multicentre, Phase III, double-masked, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of intravitreal therapy with ranibizumab (Lucentis) versus aflibercept (Eylea) versus bevacizumab (Avastin) for macular oedema due to central retinal Vein Occlusion (LEAVO) was designed to compare ranibizumab, aflibercept and bevacizumab in this type of macular oedema. The trial showed that all three drugs improved vision a lot, but bevacizumab improved vision to a slightly lesser degree than the other two drugs. All patients should be aware of these findings before considering their treatment options. A comparison of the costs and benefits of ranibizumab, aflibercept and bevacizumab, using data from the trial and other sources, found that all three led to similar improvements in quality of life. Because aflibercept and ranibizumab are so much more expensive, they may be poor value for money. If patients, their representatives and funders all agree, it may be possible to treat this type of macular oedema with bevacizumab, which is cheaper, keeping the other agents available if needed.

Cost Effectiveness of Ranibizumab vs Aflibercept vs Bevacizumab for the Treatment of Macular Oedema Due to Central Retinal Vein Occlusion: The LEAVO Study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the cost effectiveness of intravitreal ranibizumab (Lucentis), aflibercept (Eylea) and bevacizumab (Avastin) for the treatment of macular oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion. METHODS: We calculated costs and quality-adjusted life-years from the UK National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective. We performed a within-trial analysis using the efficacy, safety, resource use and health utility data from a randomised controlled trial (LEAVO) over 100 weeks. We built a discrete event simulation to model long-term outcomes. We estimated utilities using the Visual-Functioning Questionnaire-Utility Index, EQ-5D and EQ-5D with an additional vision question. We used standard UK costs sources for 2018/19 and a cost of £28 per bevacizumab injection. We discounted costs and quality-adjusted life-years at 3.5% annually. RESULTS: Bevacizumab was the least costly intervention followed by ranibizumab and aflibercept in both the within-trial analysis (bevacizumab: £6292, ranibizumab: £13,014, aflibercept: £14,328) and long-term model (bevacizumab: £18,353, ranibizumab: £30,226, aflibercept: £35,026). Although LEAVO did not demonstrate bevacizumab to be non-inferior for the visual acuity primary outcome, the three interventions generated similar quality-adjusted life-years in both analyses. Bevacizumab was always the most cost-effective intervention at a threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, even using the list price of £243 per injection. CONCLUSIONS: Wider adoption of bevacizumab for the treatment of macular oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion could result in substantial savings to healthcare systems and deliver similar health-related quality of life. However, patients, funders and ophthalmologists should be fully aware that LEAVO could not demonstrate that bevacizumab is non-inferior to the licensed agents.

A Review of the Psychometric Performance of Selected Child and Adolescent Preference-Based Measures Used to Produce Utilities for Child and Adolescent Health.

OBJECTIVE: This review examined the psychometric performance of 4 generic child- and adolescent-specific preference-based measures that can be used to produce utilities for child and adolescent health. METHODS: A systematic search was undertaken to identify studies reporting the psychometric performance of the Child Health Utility (CHU9D), EQ-5D-Y (3L or 5L), and Health Utilities Index Mark 2 (HUI2) or Mark 3 (HUI3) in children and/or adolescents. Data were extracted to assess known-group validity, convergent validity, responsiveness, reliability, acceptability, and feasibility. Data were extracted separately for the dimensions and utility index where this was reported. RESULTS: The review included 76 studies (CHU9D n = 12, EQ-5D-Y-3L n = 20, HUI2 n = 26,HUI3 n = 43), which varied considerably across conditions and sample size. EQ-5D-Y-3L had the largest amount of evidence of good psychometric performance in proportion to the number of studies examining performance. The majority of the evidence related to EQ-5D-Y-3L was based on dimensions. CHU9D was assessed in fewer studies, but the majority of studies found evidence of good psychometric performance. Evidence for HUI2 and HUI3 was more mixed, but the studies were more limited in sample size and statistical power, which was likely to have affected performance. CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity of published studies means that the evidence is based on studies across a range of countries, populations and conditions, using different study designs, different languages, different value sets and different statistical techniques. Evidence for CHU9D in particular is based on a limited number of studies. The findings raise concerns about the comparability of self-report and proxy-report responses to generate utility values for children and adolescents.

Risks of Hip and Nonvertebral Fractures in Patients With CKD G3a-G5D: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Disordered mineral metabolism complicates chronic kidney disease (CKD), but the effect of reduced kidney function on fracture risk has not been fully established. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the risks for hip and nonvertebral fractures in people with CKD. We also investigated the effects of age, sex, and CKD stage. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. STUDY POPULATION: Adults with CKD glomerular filtration rate (GFR) categories 3a-5D (G3a-G5D) compared with adults without CKD G3a-G5D. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES: Observational studies. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction was conducted by 1 reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched in March 2018 and an update was conducted in November 2019. We used random-effects models to calculate pooled risk estimates and 95% CIs. RESULTS: 17 studies met the inclusion criteria. We included 13 studies in the hip fracture systematic review and 10 studies in the meta-analysis. Studies reported data from 250,440,035 participants; 5,798,566 with CKD G3a-G5D and 363,410 with hip fractures. 4 studies were included in the nonvertebral fracture analysis, reporting data from 1,396,976 participants; 464,978 with CKD G3a-G5D and 115,284 fractures. Studies reported data from participants aged 18 to older than 90 years. We found a significant increase in fracture risk both for hip (relative risk [RR], 2.36; 95% CI, 1.64-3.39) and nonvertebral fractures (RR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.15-1.88). For hip fractures, younger patients (<65 years) had higher relative risk (RR, 7.66; 95% CI, 2.76-21.26) than older patients (>65 years; RR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.41-3.16). Greater GFR loss was associated with higher relative risk for fractures. LIMITATIONS: We could not assess the effects of bone mineral density, biochemical abnormalities, renal osteodystrophy, frailty, falls, or medications on risk for fractures. CONCLUSIONS: Risks for hip and nonvertebral fractures are increased in CKD G3a-G5D. The relative risk of hip fracture is greater in the younger than the older population and increases progressively with loss of GFR. We suggest that fracture prevention should be a consideration in CKD at any age.

The risk of hip and non-vertebral fractures in type 1 and type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis update.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is associated with increased fracture risk but we do not know what affects this risk. We investigated the risk of hip and non-vertebral fractures in diabetes and whether this risk was affected by age, gender, body mass index, diabetes type and duration, insulin use and diabetic complications. METHODS: We selected a previously published review to be updated. MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched up to March 2020. We included observational studies with age and gender-adjusted risk of fractures in adults with diabetes compared to adults without diabetes. We extracted data from published reports that we summarised using random effects model. FINDINGS: From the 3140 records identified, 49 were included, 42 in the hip fracture analysis, reporting data from 17,571,738 participants with 319,652 fractures and 17 in the non-vertebral fracture review, reporting data from 2,978,487 participants with 181,228 fractures. We found an increase in the risk of fracture in diabetes both for hip (RR 4.93, 3.06-7.95, in type 1 diabetes and RR1.33, 1.19-1.49, in type 2 diabetes) and for non-vertebral fractures (RR 1.92, 0.92-3.99, in type 1 and RR 1.19, 1,11-1.28 in type 2). At the hip, the risk was higher in the younger population in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. In those with type 2 diabetes, longer diabetes duration and insulin use was associated with an increased risk. We did not investigate the effect of bone density, falls, anti-diabetic drugs and hypoglycemia. CONCLUSION: Diabetes is associated with an increase in both hip and non-vertebral fracture risk.

Clinical and Economic Impact of a Two-layer Compression System for the Treatment of Venous Leg Ulcers: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates the clinical and cost effectiveness of a 2-layer compression system (2LBA; 3M Coban Two-Layer Compression System; 3M, St Paul, MN) compared with other 2-layer (2LB) and 4-layer (4LB) compression systems in patients with noninfected venous leg ulcers (VLUs). METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, National Health Service (NHS) Economic Evaluation, and EconLit databases were searched from inception up to January 2017. The MEDLINE search was updated on March 31, 2017. Study selection, quality assessment, and data synthesis were undertaken in accordance with recommended standards. Findings were presented narratively. RESULTS: In total, 5 studies (N = 1509 patients) of mixed methodological quality were included. At 6 months, 2LBA achieved better ulcer healing in comparison with 2LBB (odds ratio [OR], 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-2.24; P = .03) and 4LBA (OR, 1.93, 95% CI, 1.26-2.97; P = .05) in patients with newly diagnosed ulcers only. For a combined population with newly diagnosed and existing VLUs, healing outcomes were OR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.06-7.77; P = .04, and OR, 16.51; 95% CI, 2.08-131.37; P = .008, for 2LBs and 4LBs, respectively. Results on slippage were inconclusive. Adverse events were infrequent and did not differ significantly between interventions. Lower 6-month NHS costs for the combined population (£2413 vs. £2707 or £2648) and for newly diagnosed patients (£3045 vs. £3842 or £4480) were observed comparing 2LBA with 2LBB or 4LBA. Also, 2LBA was associated with better health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these findings, 2LBA may result in lower treatment costs and better ulcer healing and HRQoL compared with other multicomponent therapies, especially in patients with newly diagnosed VLUs. However, further high-quality research is needed, especially for outcomes such as slippage and bandage wear time.

The risk of hip and non-vertebral fractures in patients with Parkinson's disease and parkinsonism: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Parkinson's disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative disorder that is common in older individuals. PD patients have an increased risk of fractures compared to the general population, perhaps due to multiple falls. However, the fracture risk has not been fully assessed. To assess the impact of PD on the risk of hip and non-vertebral fractures, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Comprehensive searches of three key bibliographic databases were conducted to identify reviews and primary studies relating to the risk of fractures in patients with PD. Search terms included all relevant terms for Parkinson's disease and for fractures. We selected observational studies with data on the risk of fractures in adults with PD compared to controls without the diagnosis. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. The random-effects model was used to pool the results. Eighteen studies were included in the review. Seventeen independent studies (14 cohort and 3 case-control studies) were included in the hip fracture analysis. Nine studies (all cohorts, no case-control studies) were included in the non-vertebral fracture analysis. Study quality was judged to be moderate to good. Overall, PD patients had an increased risk for both hip fractures (2.40, 95% CI 2.04 to 2.82) and non-vertebral fractures (1.80, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.01) compared to controls. The relative risk for hip fractures was higher in men (2.93, 95% CI 2.05 to 4.18) than in women (1.81, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.04). There were no effects of the study design, geographical region, or criteria for diagnosing Parkinson's disease on these estimates of fracture risk. There is an increase in the risk of hip and non-vertebral fractures in patients with Parkinson's disease and we recommend a re-evaluation of the clinical guidelines on bone health in patients with PD to address this.

Adalimumab for non-infectious uveitis: is it cost-effective?

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Uveitis is inflammation inside the eye. Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of adalimumab compared with current practice (immunosuppressants and systemic corticosteroids) in patients with non-infectious intermediate, posterior or panuveitis and to identify areas for future research. METHODS: A Markov model was built to estimate costs and benefits of the interventions. Systematic reviews were performed to identify the available relevant clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence. Data collected in two key randomised controlled trials (VISUAL I and VISUAL II) were used to estimate the interventions' effectiveness compared with the trials' comparator arms (placebo plus limited current practice (LCP)). The analysis was performed from the National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective. Costs were calculated based on standard UK sources. RESULTS: The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of adalimumab versus LCP for the base case are £92 600 and £318 075 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained for active and inactive uveitis, respectively. In sensitivity analyses, the ICER varied from £15 579 to £120 653 and £35 642 to £800 775 per QALY for active and inactive uveitis. CONCLUSION: The estimated ICERs of adalimumab versus LCP are above generally accepted thresholds for cost-effectiveness in the UK. Adalimumab may be more cost-effective in patients with active uveitis at greater risk of blindness. However, there is an unmet need for additional primary data to provide more reliable estimates in several important areas, including effectiveness of adalimumab versus current practice (instead of LCP), incidence of long-term blindness, adalimumab effectiveness in avoiding blindness, and rates and time to remission while on adalimumab.

Dexamethasone implant for non-infectious uveitis: is it cost-effective?

BACKGROUND: Uveitis is inflammation inside the eye. The objective of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of a dexamethasone implant plus current practice (immunosuppressants and systemic corticosteroids) compared with current practice alone, in patients with non-infectious intermediate, posterior or pan-uveitis and to identify areas for future research. METHODS: A Markov model was built to estimate the costs and benefits of dexamethasone. Systematic reviews were performed to identify available relevant evidence. Quality of life data from the key randomised-controlled trial (HURON) was used to estimate the interventions' effectiveness compared with the trial's comparator arm (placebo plus limited current practice (LCP)). The analysis took a National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective. Costs were calculated based on standard UK sources. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of one dexamethasone implant compared with LCP is estimated as £19 509 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The factors with the largest impact on the results were rate of blindness and relative proportion of blindness cases avoided by dexamethasone. Using plausible alternative assumptions, dexamethasone could be cost saving or it may be associated with an ICER of £56 329 per QALY gained compared with LCP. CONCLUSIONS: Dexamethasone is estimated to be cost-effective using generally accepted UK thresholds. However, there is substantial uncertainty around these results due to scarcity of evidence. Future research on the following would help provide more reliable estimates: effectiveness of dexamethasone versus current practice (instead of LCP), with subgroup analyses for unilateral and bilateral uveitis, incidence of long-term blindness and effectiveness of dexamethasone in avoiding blindness.

Assessing prognosis and prediction of treatment response in early rheumatoid arthritis: systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, debilitating disease associated with reduced quality of life and substantial costs. It is unclear which tests and assessment tools allow the best assessment of prognosis in people with early RA and whether or not variables predict the response of patients to different drug treatments. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review evidence on the use of selected tests and assessment tools in patients with early RA (1) in the evaluation of a prognosis (review 1) and (2) as predictive markers of treatment response (review 2). DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science Conference Proceedings; searched to September 2016), registers, key websites, hand-searching of reference lists of included studies and key systematic reviews and contact with experts. STUDY SELECTION: Review 1 - primary studies on the development, external validation and impact of clinical prediction models for selected outcomes in adult early RA patients. Review 2 - primary studies on the interaction between selected baseline covariates and treatment (conventional and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs) on salient outcomes in adult early RA patients. RESULTS: Review 1 - 22 model development studies and one combined model development/external validation study reporting 39 clinical prediction models were included. Five external validation studies evaluating eight clinical prediction models for radiographic joint damage were also included. c-statistics from internal validation ranged from 0.63 to 0.87 for radiographic progression (different definitions, six studies) and 0.78 to 0.82 for the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). Predictive performance in external validations varied considerably. Three models [(1) Active controlled Study of Patients receiving Infliximab for the treatment of Rheumatoid arthritis of Early onset (ASPIRE) C-reactive protein (ASPIRE CRP), (2) ASPIRE erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ASPIRE ESR) and (3) Behandelings Strategie (BeSt)] were externally validated using the same outcome definition in more than one population. Results of the random-effects meta-analysis suggested substantial uncertainty in the expected predictive performance of models in a new sample of patients. Review 2 - 12 studies were identified. Covariates examined included anti-citrullinated protein/peptide anti-body (ACPA) status, smoking status, erosions, rheumatoid factor status, C-reactive protein level, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, swollen joint count (SJC), body mass index and vascularity of synovium on power Doppler ultrasound (PDUS). Outcomes examined included erosions/radiographic progression, disease activity, physical function and Disease Activity Score-28 remission. There was statistical evidence to suggest that ACPA status, SJC and PDUS status at baseline may be treatment effect modifiers, but not necessarily that they are prognostic of response for all treatments. Most of the results were subject to considerable uncertainty and were not statistically significant. LIMITATIONS: The meta-analysis in review 1 was limited by the availability of only a small number of external validation studies. Studies rarely investigated the interaction between predictors and treatment. SUGGESTED RESEARCH PRIORITIES: Collaborative research (including the use of individual participant data) is needed to further develop and externally validate the clinical prediction models. The clinical prediction models should be validated with respect to individual treatments. Future assessments of treatment by covariate interactions should follow good statistical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Review 1 - uncertainty remains over the optimal prediction model(s) for use in clinical practice. Review 2 - in general, there was insufficient evidence that the effect of treatment depended on baseline characteristics. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016042402. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Carotid Artery Revascularization: Systematic Review and Psychometric Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide a way to measure the impact of a disease and its associated treatments on the quality of life (QoL) from the patients' perspective. The aim of this review was to identify PROMs that have been developed and/or validated in patients with carotid artery stenosis (CAS) undergoing revascularization and to assess their psychometric properties and examine suitability for research and clinical use. METHODS: Eight electronic databases including MEDLINE and CINAHL were searched using a 2-stage search approach to identify studies reporting the development and/or validation of relevant PROMs in patients with CAS undergoing revascularization. Supplementary citation searching and hand-searching reference lists of included studies were also undertaken. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments and Oxford criteria were used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies, and the psychometric properties of the PROMs were evaluated using established assessment criteria. RESULTS: Five studies reporting on 6 PROMs were included: 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), Euro-QoL-5-Dimension Scale (EQ-5D), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Dizziness Handicap Inventory, QoL for carotid artery disease scale, and a disease-specific PROM for CAS. The rigor of the psychometric assessment of the PROMs was variable with most only attempting to assess a single psychometric criterion. No study reported evidence on construct validity and test-retest reliability. Evidence for acceptability for the use of SF-36, EQ-5D, and the disease-specific PROM was rated good in most studies. Only one study reported a Cronbach alpha score >0.70 as evidence of internal consistency. Overall, the psychometric evaluation of all included PROMs was rated as poor within the CAS population undergoing revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlighted a lack of evidence in validated PROMs used for patients undergoing carotid artery revascularization. As a result, the development and validation of a new PROM for this patient population is warranted to provide data which can supplement traditional clinical outcomes (stroke<30 days post-procedural, myocardial infarction, and death) and capture changes in health status and QoL to help inform treatment decisions.

A systematic review and economic evaluation of adalimumab and dexamethasone for treating non-infectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis or panuveitis in adults.

BACKGROUND: Non-infectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis and panuveitis are a heterogeneous group of inflammatory eye disorders. Management includes local and systemic corticosteroids, immunosuppressants and biological drugs. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of subcutaneous adalimumab (Humira®; AbbVie Ltd, Maidenhead, UK) and a dexamethasone intravitreal implant (Ozurdex®; Allergan Ltd, Marlow, UK) in adults with non-infectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis or panuveitis. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases and clinical trials registries including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched to June 2016, with an update search carried out in October 2016. REVIEW METHODS: Review methods followed published guidelines. A Markov model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone and adalimumab, each compared with current practice, from a NHS and Personal Social Services (PSS) perspective over a lifetime horizon, parameterised with published evidence. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5%. Substantial sensitivity analyses were undertaken. RESULTS: Of the 134 full-text articles screened, three studies (four articles) were included in the clinical effectiveness review. Two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) [VISUAL I (active uveitis) and VISUAL II (inactive uveitis)] compared adalimumab with placebo, with limited standard care also provided in both arms. Time to treatment failure (reduced visual acuity, intraocular inflammation, new vascular lesions) was longer in the adalimumab group than in the placebo group, with a hazard ratio of 0.50 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.70; p < 0.001] in the VISUAL I trial and 0.57 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.84; p = 0.004) in the VISUAL II trial. The adalimumab group showed a significantly greater improvement than the placebo group in the 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25) composite score in the VISUAL I trial (mean difference 4.20; p = 0.010) but not the VISUAL II trial (mean difference 2.12; p = 0.16). Some systemic adverse effects occurred more frequently with adalimumab than with placebo. One RCT [HURON (active uveitis)] compared a single 0.7-mg dexamethasone implant against a sham procedure, with limited standard care also provided in both arms. Dexamethasone provided significant benefits over the sham procedure at 8 and 26 weeks in the percentage of patients with a vitreous haze score of zero (p < 0.014), the mean best corrected visual acuity improvement (p ≤ 0.002) and the percentage of patients with a ≥ 5-point improvement in VFQ-25 score (p < 0.05). Raised intraocular pressure and cataracts occurred more frequently with dexamethasone than with the sham procedure. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for one dexamethasone implant in one eye for a combination of patients with unilateral and bilateral uveitis compared with limited current practice, as per the HURON trial, was estimated to be £19,509 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The ICER of adalimumab for patients with mainly bilateral uveitis compared with limited current practice, as per the VISUAL trials, was estimated to be £94,523 and £317,547 per QALY gained in active and inactive uveitis respectively. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the rate of blindness has the biggest impact on the model results. The interventions may be more cost-effective in populations in which there is a greater risk of blindness. LIMITATIONS: The clinical trials did not fully reflect clinical practice. Thirteen additional studies of clinically relevant comparator treatments were identified; however, network meta-analysis was not feasible. The model results are highly uncertain because of the limited evidence base. CONCLUSIONS: Two RCTs of systemic adalimumab and one RCT of a unilateral, single dexamethasone implant showed significant benefits over placebo or a sham procedure. The ICERs for adalimumab were estimated to be above generally accepted thresholds for cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone was estimated to fall below standard thresholds. However, there is substantial uncertainty around the model assumptions. In future work, primary research should compare dexamethasone and adalimumab with current treatments over the long term and in important subgroups and consider how short-term improvements relate to long-term effects on vision. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016041799. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

The Relationship between Hospital or Surgeon Volume and Outcomes in Lower Limb Vascular Surgery in the United Kingdom and Europe.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral vascular disease is a major cause of death and disability. The extent to which volume influences outcome of lower limb (LL) vascular surgery remains unclear. This review evaluated the relationship between hospital/surgeon volume and outcome in LL surgery. METHODS: Electronic databases-MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library Databases, Science Citation Index, and CINAHL-proceedings from conferences, citations, and references of included studies were searched. Studies from Europe, of adults undergoing LL vascular surgery reporting outcomes by hospital or surgeon volume were included. The quality of studies was assessed using a modified Cochrane Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool: for Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (Robins1) tool. The association between hospital/surgeon volume and outcome was summarized using tables. RESULTS: Nine studies from different European countries, comprising 67,445 patients who had undergone diverse LL surgeries were included. The increase in hospital/surgeon volume was associated with a decrease in post-operative amputations (hospital at 30 days [odds ratio {OR}: 0.20, 95% confidence interval {CI} 0.29-0.45, P = 0.01; OR: 0.67, 95% CI 0.44-0.9, P = 0.05; OR: 0.96, 95% CI 0.92-1.00, P = 0.06], at 1 year [OR: 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.98, P = 0.002; OR: 0.66, 95% CI 0.52-0.84, P < 0.001; OR: 2.05, 95% CI 1.24-3.42, P = 0.01], surgeon at 30 days [OR: 0.53, 95% CI 0.36-0.87, P = 0.01; OR: 0.40, 95% CI 0.18-0.91, P = 0.03; OR: 0.41, 95% CI 0.24-0.69, P = 0.0006]). The evidence on an association between hospital/surgeon volume and mortality was contradictory, but mortality and amputations may covary by hospital volume. There were an insufficient number of studies reporting on the other variables to draw firm conclusions, but their results suggest that high-volume hospitals may undertake more repeated surgeries/revascularizations and limb salvage. The impact of hospital/surgical volume on adverse events and length of hospitalization could not be determined. CONCLUSIONS: High-volume hospitals/surgeons may undertake fewer amputations and mortality and amputations may covary. The finding that hospital and surgeon volume affected the number of secondary amputations has implications on reorganization of vascular surgery services. However, due to the small number and poor quality of some of the included studies, decisions on reorganization of LL vascular surgery services should be supplemented by results from clinical audits. There is need for standardization of definition of volume stratification of outcomes by patient's clinical conditions.

Patient-reported outcome measures in patients with peripheral arterial disease: a systematic review of psychometric properties.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is generally associated with considerable morbidity and reduced quality of life. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide important information about the burden of disease and impact of treatment in affected patients. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the review was to identify and appraise studies reporting the psychometric evaluation of PROMs administered to a specified population of patients with PAD with a view to recommending suitable PROMs. METHODS: A systematic review of peer-reviewed English language articles was undertaken to identify primary studies reporting psychometric properties of PROMs in English-speaking patients with various stages of PAD. Comprehensive searches were completed up until January 2015. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken independently by at least two researchers. Findings were presented as tabular and narrative summaries based on accepted guidance. RESULTS: Psychometric evaluation of 6 generic and 7 condition-specific PROMs reported in 14 studies contributed data to the review. The frequently reported measure was the SF-36 (n = 11 studies); others included the Walking Impairment Questionnaire (n = 8 studies), EQ-5D (n = 5 studies) and the Vascular Quality of Life Questionnaire (n = 3 studies). Studies included a diverse PAD population and varied in methodology, including approach to validation of PROMs. CONCLUSIONS: Various PROMs have been validated in patients with PAD but no study provided evidence of a full psychometric evaluation in the patient population. Careful selection is required to identify reliable and valid PROMs to use in clinical and research settings.

Economic impact of Tegaderm chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) dressing in critically ill patients.

PURPOSE: To estimate the economic impact of a TegadermTM chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) gel dressing compared with a standard intravenous (i.v.) dressing (defined as non-antimicrobial transparent film dressing), used for insertion site care of short-term central venous and arterial catheters (intravascular catheters) in adult critical care patients using a cost-consequence model populated with data from published sources. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A decision analytical cost-consequence model was developed which assigned each patient with an indwelling intravascular catheter and a standard dressing, a baseline risk of associated dermatitis, local infection at the catheter insertion site and catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI), estimated from published secondary sources. The risks of these events for patients with a Tegaderm CHG were estimated by applying the effectiveness parameters from the clinical review to the baseline risks. Costs were accrued through costs of intervention (i.e. Tegaderm CHG or standard intravenous dressing) and hospital treatment costs depended on whether the patients had local dermatitis, local infection or CRBSI. Total costs were estimated as mean values of 10,000 probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) runs. RESULTS: Tegaderm CHG resulted in an average cost-saving of £77 per patient in an intensive care unit. Tegaderm CHG also has a 98.5% probability of being cost-saving compared to standard i.v. dressings. CONCLUSIONS: The analyses suggest that Tegaderm CHG is a cost-saving strategy to reduce CRBSI and the results were robust to sensitivity analyses.

Pre-hospital non-invasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Non-invasive ventilation (NIV), in the form of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or bilevel inspiratory positive airway pressure (BiPAP), is used in hospital to treat patients with acute respiratory failure. Pre-hospital NIV may be more effective than in-hospital NIV but requires additional ambulance service resources. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of pre-hospital NIV compared with usual care for adults presenting to the emergency services with acute respiratory failure and to identify priorities for future research. DATA SOURCES: Fourteen electronic databases and research registers (including MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) were searched from inception to August 2013, supplemented by hand-searching reference lists and contacting experts in the field. REVIEW METHODS: We included all randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of pre-hospital NIV in patients with acute respiratory failure. Methodological quality was assessed according to established criteria. An aggregate data network meta-analysis (NMA) of mortality and intubation was used to jointly estimate intervention effects relative to usual care. A NMA, using individual patient-level data (IPD) and aggregate data where IPD were not available, was carried out to assess whether or not covariates were treatment effect modifiers. A de novo economic model was developed to explore the costs and health outcomes when pre-hospital NIV (specifically CPAP provided by paramedics) and standard care (in-hospital NIV) were applied to a hypothetical cohort of patients with acute respiratory failure. RESULTS: The literature searches identified 2284 citations. Of the 10 studies that met the inclusion criteria, eight were randomised controlled trials and two were quasi-randomised trials (six CPAP; four BiPAP; sample sizes 23-207 participants). IPD were available from seven trials (650 patients). The aggregate data NMA suggested that CPAP was the most effective treatment in terms of mortality (probability = 0.989) and intubation rate (probability = 0.639), and reduced both mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.41, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.20 to 0.77] and intubation rate (OR 0.32, 95% CrI 0.17 to 0.62) compared with standard care. The effect of BiPAP on mortality (OR 1.94, 95% CrI 0.65 to 6.14) and intubation rate (OR 0.40, 95% CrI 0.14 to 1.16) compared with standard care was uncertain. The combined IPD and aggregate data NMA suggested that sex was a statistically significant treatment effect modifier for mortality. The economic analysis showed that pre-hospital CPAP was more effective and more expensive than standard care, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £20,514 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and a 49.5% probability of being cost-effective at the £20,000-per-QALY threshold. Variation in the incidence of eligible patients had a marked impact on cost-effectiveness and the expected value of sample information for a future randomised trial. LIMITATIONS: The meta-analysis lacked power to detect potentially important differences in outcome (particularly for BiPAP), the intervention was not always compared with the best alternative care (in-hospital NIV) in the primary studies and findings may not be generalisable. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-hospital CPAP can reduce mortality and intubation rates, but cost-effectiveness is uncertain and the value of further randomised evaluation depends on the incidence of suitable patients. A feasibility study is required to determine if a large pragmatic trial of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness is appropriate. STUDY REGISTRATION: The study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002933. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.