First trimester screening for pre-eclampsia and targeted aspirin prophylaxis: a cost-effectiveness cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Investigate cost-effectiveness of first trimester pre-eclampsia screening using the Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) algorithm and targeted aspirin prophylaxis in comparison with standard care. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: London tertiary hospital. POPULATION: 5957 pregnancies screened for pre-eclampsia using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) method. METHODS: Differences in pregnancy outcomes between those who developed pre-eclampsia, term pre-eclampsia and preterm pre-eclampsia were compared by the Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-square tests. The FMF algorithm was applied retrospectively to the cohort. A decision analytic model was used to estimate costs and outcomes for pregnancies screened using NICE and those screened using the FMF algorithm. The decision point probabilities were calculated using the included cohort. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental healthcare costs and QALY gained per pregnancy screened. RESULTS: Of 5957 pregnancies, 12.8% and 15.9% were screen-positive for development of pre-eclampsia using the NICE and FMF methods, respectively. Of those who were screen-positive by NICE recommendations, aspirin was not prescribed in 25%. Across the three groups, namely, pregnancies without pre-eclampsia, term pre-eclampsia and preterm pre-eclampsia there was a statistically significant trend in rates of emergency caesarean (respectively 21%, 43% and 71.4%; P < 0.001), admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) (5.9%, 9.4%, 41%; P < 0.001) and length of stay in NICU. The FMF algorithm was associated with seven fewer cases of preterm pre-eclampsia, cost saving of £9.06 and QALY gain of 0.00006/pregnancy screened. CONCLUSIONS: Using a conservative approach, application of the FMF algorithm achieved clinical benefit and an economic cost saving.

Using automated text classification to explore uncertainty in NICE appraisals for drugs for rare diseases.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the application, feasibility, and validity of supervised learning models for text classification in appraisals for rare disease treatments (RDTs) in relation to uncertainty, and analyzed differences between appraisals based on the classification results. METHODS: We analyzed appraisals for RDTs (n = 94) published by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) between January 2011 and May 2023. We used Naïve Bayes, Lasso, and Support Vector Machine models in a binary text classification task (classifying paragraphs as either referencing uncertainty in the evidence base or not). To illustrate the results, we tested hypotheses in relation to the appraisal guidance, advanced therapy medicinal product (ATMP) status, disease area, and age group. RESULTS: The best performing (Lasso) model achieved 83.6 percent classification accuracy (sensitivity = 74.4 percent, specificity = 92.6 percent). Paragraphs classified as referencing uncertainty were significantly more likely to arise in highly specialized technology (HST) appraisals compared to appraisals from the technology appraisal (TA) guidance (adjusted odds ratio = 1.44, 95 percent CI 1.09, 1.90, p = 0.004). There was no significant association between paragraphs classified as referencing uncertainty and appraisals for ATMPs, non-oncology RDTs, and RDTs indicated for children only or adults and children. These results were robust to the threshold value used for classifying paragraphs but were sensitive to the choice of classification model. CONCLUSION: Using supervised learning models for text classification in NICE appraisals for RDTs is feasible, but the results of downstream analyses may be sensitive to the choice of classification model.

Approaches to optimising access to NICE-approved biologic anti-TNFs for patients with rheumatoid arthritis with moderately active disease.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that is associated with joint pain and stiffness. Biologics represent some of the most effective treatments for RA, but previous guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has limited their use to patients with severely active disease. This has meant patients with moderately active RA have been treated as if they have an acceptable disease state, despite many cases where the inflammation has a major impact on joint damage, mobility, pain and quality of life. However, recent guideline changes (NICE TA715) have approved the use of three biologics - adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab - for the treatment of moderately active RA. MAIN BODY: In response to these changes, we have held discussions with medical teams from across the UK to consider the main implications for implementation of these new recommendations, as well as any differences in approach that may exist at a local level. Several key challenges were identified. These included establishing methods of educating both physicians and patients concerning the new availability of the biologic treatments, with suggestions of various organisations that could be approached to circulate informative material. Identifying which patients with moderately active RA stand to benefit was another discussion topic. Relying solely on scoring systems like Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints (DAS28) was acknowledged to have limitations, and alternative complementary approaches such as ultrasound, as well as assessing a patient's co-morbidities, could also be useful tools in determining those who could benefit from biologics. An additional challenge for the process of patient identification has been the increase in the use of telemedicine consultations in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. More use of patient-reported outcomes was raised as one possible solution, and the importance of maintaining up-to-date databases on patient disease scores and treatment history was also stressed. CONCLUSION: While challenges exist in education and identifying patients who may benefit from the use of biologics, the NICE TA715 recommendations hold great potential in addressing an unmet need for the treatment of moderate RA.

National and international guidelines on the management of twin pregnancies: a comparative review.

Twin gestations are associated with increased risk of pregnancy complications. However, high-quality evidence regarding the management of twin pregnancies is limited, often resulting in inconsistencies in the recommendations of various national and international professional societies. In addition, some recommendations related to the management of twin gestations are often missing from the clinical guidelines dedicated to twin pregnancies and are instead included in the practice guidelines on specific pregnancy complications (eg, preterm birth) of the same professional society. This can make it challenging for care providers to easily identify and compare recommendations for the management of twin pregnancies. This study aimed to identify, summarize, and compare the recommendations of selected professional societies from high-income countries on the management of twin pregnancies, highlighting areas of both consensus and controversy. We reviewed clinical practice guidelines of selected major professional societies that were either specific to twin pregnancies or were focused on pregnancy complications or aspects of antenatal care that may be relevant for twin pregnancies. We decided a priori to include clinical guidelines from 7 high-income countries (United States, Canada, United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Australia and New Zealand grouped together) and from 2 international societies (International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology and the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics). We identified recommendations regarding the following care areas: first-trimester care, antenatal surveillance, preterm birth and other pregnancy complications (preeclampsia, fetal growth restriction, and gestational diabetes mellitus), and timing and mode of delivery. We identified 28 guidelines published by 11 professional societies from the 7 countries and 2 international societies. Thirteen of these guidelines focus on twin pregnancies, whereas the other 16 focus on specific pregnancy complications predominantly in singletons but also include some recommendations for twin pregnancies. Most of the guidelines are recent, with 15 of the 29 guidelines published over the past 3 years. We identified considerable disagreement among guidelines, primarily in 4 key areas: screening and prevention of preterm birth, using aspirin to prevent preeclampsia, defining fetal growth restriction, and the timing of delivery. In addition, there is limited guidance on several important areas, including the implications of the "vanishing twin" phenomenon, technical aspects and risks of invasive procedures, nutrition and weight gain, physical and sexual activity, the optimal growth chart to be used in twin pregnancies, the diagnosis and management of gestational diabetes mellitus, and intrapartum care.This consolidation of key recommendations across several clinical practice guidelines can assist healthcare providers in accessing and comparing recommendations on the management of twin pregnancies and identifies high-priority areas for future research based on either continued disagreement among societies or limited current evidence to guide care.

The Evolving Nature of Health Technology Assessment: A Critical Appraisal of NICE's New Methods Manual.

OBJECTIVES: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recently completed a review of its methods for health technology assessment, involving a 2-stage public consultation. We appraise proposed methodological changes and analyze key decisions. METHODS: We categorize all changes proposed in the first consultation as "critical," "moderate" or "limited" updates, considering the importance of the topic and the degree of change or the level of reinforcement. Proposals were followed through the review process, for their inclusion, exclusion, or amendment in the second consultation and the new manual. RESULTS: The end-of-life value modifier was replaced with a new "disease severity" modifier and other potential modifiers were rejected. The usefulness of a comprehensive evidence base was emphasized, clarifying when nonrandomized studies can be used, with further guidance on "real-world" evidence developed separately. A greater degree of uncertainty was accepted in circumstances when evidence generation raised challenges, in particular for children, rare diseases, and innovative technologies. For some topics, such as health inequality, discounting, unrelated healthcare costs, and value of information, significant changes were possibly warranted, but NICE decided not to make any revisions at present. CONCLUSION: Most of the changes to NICE's health technology assessment methods are appropriate and modest in impact. Nevertheless, some decisions were not well justified and further research is needed on several topics, including investigation of societal preferences. Ultimately, NICE's role of protecting National Health Services resources for valuable interventions that can contribute toward improving overall population health must be safeguarded, without accepting weaker evidence.

Health Technology Assessment-Informed Decision Making by the Federal Joint Committee/Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care in Germany and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in England: The Role of Budget Impact.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to test (official) evaluation criteria including the potential role of budget impact (BI) on health technology assessment (HTA) outcomes published by the Federal Joint Committee (Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss [GBA]) and the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen [IQWiG]) in Germany as well as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England. METHODS: Data were extracted from all publicly available GBA decisions and IQWiG assessments as well as NICE single technology appraisals between January 2011 and June 2018, and information with regard to evaluation criteria used by these agencies was collected. Data were analyzed using logistic regression to estimate the effect of the BI on the HTA outcomes while controlling for criteria used by GBA/IQWiG and NICE. RESULTS: NICE recommendations are largely driven by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and, if applicable, by end-of-life criteria (P < .01). While IQWiG assessments are significantly affected by the availability of randomized controlled trials and patient-relevant endpoints (P < .01), GBA appraisals primarily focus on endpoints (P < .01). The BI correlated with NICE single technology appraisals (inverted-U relationship, P < .1) and IQWiG recommendations (increasing linear relationship, P < .05), but not with GBA decisions (P > .1). Nevertheless, given that IQWiG assessments seem to be more rigorous than GBA appraisals regarding the consideration of evidence-based evaluation criteria, decisions by GBA might be negatively associated with the BI. CONCLUSIONS: Results reveal that GBA/IQWiG and NICE follow their official evaluation criteria consistently. After controlling for all significant variables, the BI seems to have an (independent) effect on HTA outcomes as well.

Quality-Adjusted Life Expectancy Norms for the English Population.

OBJECTIVES: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in England has implemented severity-of-disease modifiers that give greater weight to health benefits accruing to patients who experience a larger shortfall in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) under current standard of care than healthy individuals. This requires an estimate of quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) of the general population based on age and sex. Previous QALE population norms are based on nearly 30-year-old assessments of health-related quality of life in the general population. This study provides updated QALE estimates for the English population based on age and sex. METHODS: 5-level version of EQ-5D data for 14 412 participants from the Health Survey for England (waves 2017 and 2018) were pooled, and health-related quality of life population norms were calculated. These norms were combined with official life tables from the Office for National Statistics for 2017 to 2019 using the Sullivan method to derive QALE estimates based on age and sex. Values were discounted using 0%, 1.5%, and 3.5% discount rates. RESULTS: QALE at birth is 68.24 QALYs for men and 68.21 QALYs for women. These values are significantly lower than previously published QALE population norms based on the older 3-level version of EQ-5D data. CONCLUSION: This study provides new QALE population norms for England that serve to establish absolute and relative QALY shortfalls for the purpose of health technology assessments.

Clinical effectiveness reporting of novel cancer drugs in the context of non-proportional hazards: a review of nice single technology appraisals.

OBJECTIVES: The hazard ratio (HR) is a commonly used summary statistic when comparing time to event (TTE) data between trial arms, but assumes the presence of proportional hazards (PH). Non-proportional hazards (NPH) are increasingly common in NICE technology appraisals (TAs) due to an abundance of novel cancer treatments, which have differing mechanisms of action compared with traditional chemotherapies. The goal of this study is to understand how pharmaceutical companies, evidence review groups (ERGs) and appraisal committees (ACs) test for PH and report clinical effectiveness in the context of NPH. METHODS: A thematic analysis of NICE TAs concerning novel cancer treatments published between 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2021 was undertaken. Data on PH testing and clinical effectiveness reporting for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were obtained from company submissions, ERG reports, and final appraisal determinations (FADs). RESULTS: NPH were present for OS or PFS in 28/40 appraisals, with log-cumulative hazard plots the most common testing methodology (40/40), supplemented by Schoenfeld residuals (20/40) and/or other statistical methods (6/40). In the context of NPH, the HR was ubiquitously reported by companies, inconsistently critiqued by ERGs (10/28), and commonly reported in FADs (23/28). CONCLUSIONS: There is inconsistency in PH testing methodology used in TAs. ERGs are inconsistent in critiquing use of the HR in the context of NPH, and even when critiqued it remains a commonly reported outcome measure in FADs. Other measures of clinical effectiveness should be considered, along with guidance on clinical effectiveness reporting when NPH are present.

Justice, Transparency and the Guiding Principles of the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is the UK's primary healthcare priority-setting body, responsible for advising the National Health Service in England on which technologies to fund and which to reject. Until recently, the normative approach underlying this advice was described in a 2008 document entitled 'Social value judgements: Principles for the development of NICE guidance' (SVJ). In January 2020, however, NICE replaced SVJ with a new articulation of its guiding principles. Given the significant evolution of NICE's methods between 2008 and 2020, this study examines whether this new document ('Principles') offers a transparent account of NICE's current normative approach. It finds that it does not, deriving much of its content directly from SVJ and failing to fully acknowledge or explain how and why NICE's approach has since changed. In particular, Principles is found to offer a largely procedural account of NICE decision-making, despite evidence of the increasing reliance of NICE's methods on substantive decision-rules and 'modifiers' that cannot be justified in purely procedural terms. Thus, while Principles tells NICE's stakeholders much about how the organisation goes about the process of decision-making, it tells them little about the substantive grounds on which its decisions are now based. It is therefore argued that Principles does not offer a transparent account of NICE's normative approach (either alone, or alongside other documents) and that, given NICE's reliance on transparency as a requirement of procedural justice, NICE does not in this respect satisfy its own specification of a just decision-maker.

Prediction of preterm pre-eclampsia according to NICE and ACOG criteria: descriptive study of 597 492 Danish births from 2008 to 2017.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this national study was to examine the incidence of preterm pre-eclampsia (PE) and the proportion of women with risk factors for PE, according to the criteria suggested by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), during a 10-year period in Denmark. METHODS: Data from The Danish National Patient Registry and the Danish Medical Birth Registry were used to obtain the incidence of preterm PE with delivery < 37 weeks' gestation and risk factors for PE for all deliveries in Denmark from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2017. The proportion of women with at least one high-risk factor and/or at least two moderate-risk factors for PE, according to the NICE and ACOG criteria, and the detection rate for preterm PE were examined. Race, socioeconomic status and the woman's weight at birth were not available from the registries used, and information on Type-2 diabetes was found to be invalid. RESULTS: Of the 597 492 deliveries during the study period, any PE was registered in 3.2%, preterm PE < 37 weeks in 0.7% and early-onset PE < 34 weeks' gestation in 0.3%. These proportions remained largely unchanged from 2008 to 2017. Overall, the NICE criteria were fulfilled in 7.5% of deliveries and the ACOG criteria in 17.3%. In the total population, the NICE criteria identified 47.6% of those with preterm PE and the ACOG criteria identified 60.5%. The current criteria for offering aspirin treatment in Denmark largely correspond to having at least one NICE high-risk factor. In 2017, a total of 3.5% of deliveries had at least one NICE high-risk factor, which identified 28.4% of cases that later developed preterm PE. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of preterm PE remained largely unchanged in Denmark from 2008 to 2017. Prediction of PE according to high-risk maternal factors could be improved by addition of moderate-risk factors. © 2021 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Qualitative research to inform economic modelling: a case study in older people's views on implementing the NICE falls prevention guideline.

BACKGROUND: High prevalence of falls among older persons makes falls prevention a public health priority. Yet community-based falls prevention face complexity in implementation and any commissioning strategy should be subject to economic evaluation to ensure cost-effective use of healthcare resources. The study aims to capture the views of older people on implementing the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline on community-based falls prevention and explore how the qualitative data can be used to inform commissioning strategies and conceptual modelling of falls prevention economic evaluation in the local area of Sheffield. METHODS: Focus group and interview participants (n = 27) were recruited from Sheffield, England, and comprised falls prevention service users and eligible non-users of varying falls risks. Topics concerned key components of the NICE-recommended falls prevention pathway, including falls risk screening, multifactorial risk assessment and treatment uptake and adherence. Views on other topics concerning falls prevention were also invited. Framework analysis was applied for data analysis, involving data familiarisation, identifying themes, indexing, charting and mapping and interpretation. The qualitative data were mapped to three frameworks: (1) facilitators and barriers to implementing the NICE-recommended pathway and contextual factors; (2) intervention-related causal mechanisms for formulating commissioning strategies spanning context, priority setting, need, supply and demand; and (3) methodological and evaluative challenges for public health economic modelling. RESULTS: Two cross-component factors were identified: health motives of older persons; and professional competence. Participants highlighted the need for intersectoral approaches and prioritising the vulnerable groups. The local commissioning strategy should consider the socioeconomic, linguistic, geographical, legal and cultural contexts, priority setting challenges, supply-side mechanisms spanning provider, organisation, funding and policy (including intersectoral) and health and non-health demand motives. Methodological and evaluative challenges identified included: incorporating non-health outcomes and societal intervention costs; considering dynamic complexity; considering social determinants of health; and conducting equity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Holistic qualitative research can inform how commissioned falls prevention pathways can be feasible and effective. Qualitative data can inform commissioning strategies and conceptual modelling for economic evaluations of falls prevention and other geriatric interventions. This would improve the structural validity of quantitative models used to inform geriatric public health policies.

Medicine characteristics affecting the time to guidance publication by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the single technology appraisal process.

OBJECTIVE: In England, the time gap between marketing authorization (MA) and guidance publication by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) can limit patients' access to new medicines. In this study, our aim was to identify medicine characteristics associated with the long time gap between MA and guidance publication and explore the influencing factors. METHODS: We identified 116 single technology appraisals from 2016 to 2020 using publicly available data, and extracted information on the year of appraisal completion, application type, experiences of similar appraisals, orphan medicinal products (OMPs), cancer medicines, and accelerated assessment. Multiple regression analyses were performed to analyze the associations between the medicine characteristics and key time periods related to health technology assessment and MA processes. RESULTS: OMPs were associated with a long period between MA and guidance publication. Specifically, OMPs and cancer medicines were associated with slow guidance publication after the final scope (FS) development. However, there was no association between OMPs and the period between validation of MA application and FS development. Non-double-blinded randomized clinical trials and the use of comparators not specified in the FS were associated with slow guidance publication after the FS development. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that OMPs are associated with a longer period between MA and guidance publication by the NICE than non-OMPs; this may be attributed to the slow guidance publication after the FS development. These findings indicate the necessity to shorten the appraisal process for OMPs.

Recognition and management of neonatal sepsis.

Neonatal sepsis results from acute bacterial or viral infection occurring in the first 28 days of life. It causes significant morbidity and mortality, although the outcome can be improved by early recognition and prompt treatment by health professionals. This article describes the most common causes of sepsis, and explains why neonates are particularly vulnerable to infection. It highlights the non-specific way in which an infant with a serious infection may present, indicating the crucial features to elicit during history taking and examination, and emphasising the 'red-flag' signs and symptoms that should increase suspicion of a serious illness. The authors have adapted National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines to produce an evidence-based approach to the management of an infant with suspected sepsis, and describe the roles of nurses in ensuring effective treatment and best outcomes for these babies.

A simple cut-off for waist-to-height ratio (0·5) can act as an indicator for cardiometabolic risk: recent data from adults in the Health Survey for England.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has acknowledged the value of waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) as an indicator for 'early health risk'. We used recent UK data to explore whether classification based on WHtR identifies more adults at cardiometabolic risk than the 'matrix' based on BMI and waist circumference, currently used for screening. Data from the Health Survey for England (4112 adults aged 18+ years) were used to identify cardiometabolic risk, indicated by raised glycated Hb, dyslipidaemia and hypertension. HbA1c, total/HDL-cholesterol and systolic blood pressure (BP) were more strongly associated with WHtR than the 'matrix'. In logistic regression models for HbA1c ≥ 48 mmol/mol, total/HDL-cholesterol > 4 and hypertension (BP > 140/90 mmHg or on medication), WHtR had a higher predictive value than the 'matrix'. AUC was significantly greater for WHtR than the 'matrix' for raised HbA1c and hypertension. Of adults with raised HbA1c, 15 % would be judged as 'no increased risk' using the 'matrix' in contrast to 3 % using WHtR < 0·5. For hypertension, comparative values were 23 and 9 %, and for total/HDL-cholesterol > 4, 26 and 13 %. Nearly one-third of the 'no increased risk' group in the 'matrix' had WHtR ≥ 0·5 and hence could be underdiagnosed for cardiometabolic risk. WHtR has the potential to be a better indicator of cardiometabolic risks associated with central obesity than the current NICE 'matrix'. The cut-off WHtR 0·5 in early screening translates to a simple message, 'your waist should be less than half your height', that allows individuals to be aware of their health risks.

Primary surgical management of anterior pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Anterior compartment prolapse is the most common pelvic organ prolapse (POP) with a range of surgical treatment options available. OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical treatments for the repair of anterior POP. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of randomised controlled trials comparing surgical treatments for women with POP. Network meta-analysis was possible for anterior POP, same-site recurrence outcome. A Markov model was used to compare the cost-utility of surgical treatments for the primary repair of anterior POP from a UK National Health Service perspective. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 27 eligible trials for the network meta-analysis involving eight surgical treatments tested on 3194 women. Synthetic mesh was the most effective in preventing recurrence at the same site. There was no evidence to suggest a difference between synthetic non-absorbable mesh, synthetic partially absorbable mesh, and biological mesh. The cost-utility analysis, which incorporated effectiveness, complications and cost data, found non-mesh repair to have the highest probability of being cost-effective. The conclusions were robust to model inputs including effectiveness, costs and utility values. CONCLUSIONS: Anterior colporrhaphy augmented with mesh appeared to be cost-ineffective in women requiring primary repair of anterior POP. There is a need for further research on long-term effectiveness and the safety of mesh products to establish their relative cost-effectiveness with a greater certainty. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: New study finds mesh cost-ineffective in women with anterior pelvic organ prolapse.

Updated guidance for the management of twin and triplet pregnancies from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance, UK: What's new that may improve perinatal outcomes?

In September 2019, NICE published updated guidance on the management of multiple pregnancy (NG 137). Many of the previous recommendations for care are upheld but there have been important changes: increased frequency of combined ultrasound/specialist antenatal care appointments for pregnancies containing a monochorionic placenta (twins and triplets), increased frequency of ultrasound monitoring in all triplet pregnancies, changes in the definition of selective growth restriction and its subsequent referral pathways, the introduction of some monitoring for twin (or triplet) anemia polycythemia sequence in monochorionic pregnancies (albeit in complex pregnancies or at an advanced stage), and a recommended timing of birth for any pregnancy with monoamniotic fetuses. New recommendations have been made for mode of delivery, fetal monitoring in labor, maternal analgesia, and the prevention of postpartum hemorrhage. The absence of any recommendation relating to the prevention of preterm birth is notable. The basis and implications of the updates that may improve perinatal outcomes are discussed.

Comparison of criteria of International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Different screening procedures and diagnostic criteria are being followed in the same as well as in different countries with no single standard criteria established for diagnosis of GDM. So far, there are no studies in the Indian population comparing IADPSG with NICE criteria. OBJECTIVE: To compare International Association of Pregnancy and Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus and its influence on maternal and perinatal outcomes. METHOD: This prospective observational study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of a tertiary care institute in South India from March 2017 to October 2018. Six-hundred and eighty women with or without risk factors for GDM were recruited in the study and screened for GDM based on IADPSG and NICE criteria. Women with preexisting diabetes mellitus or with fasting plasma glucose ≥ 126 mg/dl were excluded. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of GDM in our study was 27.2% by either IADPSG/NICE criteria. In this study, 25.1% women and 11.6% women were diagnosed as GDM using IADPSG and NICE criteria, respectively. The level of agreement between the two diagnostic criteria was found to be poor in our study and was statistically significant (kappa = 0.429, p < 0.001). Women testing IADPSG-positive NICE-negative had a higher risk of GHTN, abortions, PROM, preterm delivery, caesarean section and congenital anomalies, meconium-stained liquor, and low Apgar scores at 1 min when compared to non GDM group. In addition, except for preterm delivery, women diagnosed as GDM by both IADPSG and NICE criteria had adverse outcomes such as preeclampsia, urinary tract infection, and polyhydramnios. Women diagnosed as GDM in IADPSG-negative NICE-positive had no significant adverse maternal or perinatal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: IADPSG criteria appear to be more robust than NICE criteria for diagnosis of GDM. Women with substantial risk of maternal and perinatal outcomes are better identified by IADPSG criteria who would have been missed if NICE criteria was used.

NICE and Fair? Health Technology Assessment Policy Under the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, 1999-2018.

The UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is responsible for conducting health technology assessment (HTA) on behalf of the National Health Service (NHS). In seeking to justify its recommendations to the NHS about which technologies to fund, NICE claims to adopt two complementary ethical frameworks, one procedural-accountability for reasonableness (AfR)-and one substantive-an 'ethics of opportunity costs' (EOC) that rests primarily on the notion of allocative efficiency. This study is the first to empirically examine normative changes to NICE's approach and to analyse whether these enhance or diminish the fairness of its decision-making, as judged against these frameworks. It finds that increasing formalisation of NICE's approach and a weakening of the burden of proof laid on technologies undergoing HTA have together undermined its commitment to EOC. This implies a loss of allocative efficiency and a shift in the balance of how the interests of different NHS users are served, in favour of those who benefit directly from NICE's recommendations. These changes also weaken NICE's commitment to AfR by diminishing the publicity of its decision-making and by encouraging the adoption of rationales that cannot easily be shown to meet the relevance condition. This signals a need for either substantial reform of NICE's approach, or more accurate communication of the ethical reasoning on which it is based. The study also highlights the need for further empirical work to explore the impact of these policy changes on NICE's practice of HTA and to better understand how and why they have come about.

Prospective evaluation of screening performance of first-trimester prediction models for preterm preeclampsia in an Asian population.

BACKGROUND: The administration of aspirin <16 weeks gestation to women who are at high risk for preeclampsia has been shown to reduce the rate of preterm preeclampsia by 65%. The traditional approach to identify such women who are at risk is based on risk factors from maternal characteristics, obstetrics, and medical history as recommended by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. An alternative approach to screening for preeclampsia has been developed by the Fetal Medicine Foundation. This approach allows the estimation of patient-specific risks of preeclampsia that requires delivery before a specified gestational age with the use of Bayes theorem-based model. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the diagnostic accuracy of the Fetal Medicine Foundation Bayes theorem-based model, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommendations for the prediction of preterm preeclampsia at 11-13+6 weeks gestation in a large Asian population STUDY DESIGN: This was a prospective, nonintervention, multicenter study in 10,935 singleton pregnancies at 11-13+6 weeks gestation in 11 recruiting centers across 7 regions in Asia between December 2016 and June 2018. Maternal characteristics and medical, obstetric, and drug history were recorded. Mean arterial pressure and uterine artery pulsatility indices were measured according to standardized protocols. Maternal serum placental growth factor concentrations were measured by automated analyzers. The measured values of mean arterial pressure, uterine artery pulsatility index, and placental growth factor were converted into multiples of the median. The Fetal Medicine Foundation Bayes theorem-based model was used for the calculation of patient-specific risk of preeclampsia at <37 weeks gestation (preterm preeclampsia) and at any gestation (all preeclampsia) in each participant. The performance of screening for preterm preeclampsia and all preeclampsia by a combination of maternal factors, mean arterial pressure, uterine artery pulsatility index, and placental growth factor (triple test) was evaluated with the adjustment of aspirin use. We examined the predictive performance of the model by the use of receiver operating characteristic curve and calibration by measurements of calibration slope and calibration in the large. The detection rate of screening by the Fetal Medicine Foundation Bayes theorem-based model was compared with the model that was derived from the application of American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommendations. RESULTS: There were 224 women (2.05%) who experienced preeclampsia, which included 73 cases (0.67%) of preterm preeclampsia. In pregnancies with preterm preeclampsia, the mean multiples of the median values of mean arterial pressure and uterine artery pulsatility index were significantly higher (mean arterial pressure, 1.099 vs 1.008 [P<.001]; uterine artery pulsatility index, 1.188 vs 1.063[P=.006]), and the mean placental growth factor multiples of the median was significantly lower (0.760 vs 1.100 [P<.001]) than in women without preeclampsia. The Fetal Medicine Foundation triple test achieved detection rates of 48.2%, 64.0%, 71.8%, and 75.8% at 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20% fixed false-positive rates, respectively, for the prediction of preterm preeclampsia. These were comparable with those of previously published data from the Fetal Medicine Foundation study. Screening that used the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommendations achieved detection rate of 54.6% at 20.4% false-positive rate. The detection rate with the use of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline was 26.3% at 5.5% false-positive rate. CONCLUSION: Based on a large number of women, this study has demonstrated that the Fetal Medicine Foundation Bayes theorem-based model is effective in the prediction of preterm preeclampsia in an Asian population and that this method of screening is superior to the approach recommended by American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. We have also shown that the Fetal Medicine Foundation prediction model can be implemented as part of routine prenatal care through the use of the existing infrastructure of routine prenatal care.

Highlighting the goals for Parkinson's care: commentary on NICE Guidelines for Parkinson's in Adults (NG71).

Parkinson's disease is a chronic multi-system disease that can cause motor and non-motor symptoms, cognitive changes and variably effective medications. Optimal management of the condition requires a multi-disciplinary team of healthcare professionals to work closely with the patient and their carers. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence published updated guidelines on managing Parkinson's disease in adults in 2017. Here we discuss the implications of this guidance to current healthcare professionals involved in the care of people with Parkinson's disease. The guidance highlights the importance of clear communication with people with Parkinson's disease. We discuss examples of this, including providing a point of contact with specialist services for people with Parkinson's disease and ensuring information about the risks of impulse control disorders are given to people on dopaminergic therapy. The breadth of services required by people with Parkinson's disease is also described, including the need for access to physiotherapy, occupational therapy and speech and language therapy as well as treatment monitoring services for Clozapine. In addition, we emphasise the continued importance of ensuring people with Parkinson's disease receive their medications on time when in hospital or a care home.