To Be Frail or Not to Be Frail: This Is the Question-A Critical Narrative Review of Frailty.

Many factors have contributed to rendering frailty an emerging, relevant, and very popular concept. First, many pandemics that have affected humanity in history, including COVID-19, most recently, have had more severe effects on frail people compared to non-frail ones. Second, the increase in human life expectancy observed in many developed countries, including Italy has led to a rise in the percentage of the older population that is more likely to be frail, which is why frailty is much a more common concern among geriatricians compared to other the various health-care professionals. Third, the stratification of people according to the occurrence and the degree of frailty allows healthcare decision makers to adequately plan for the allocation of available human professional and economic resources. Since frailty is considered to be fully preventable, there are relevant consequences in terms of potential benefits both in terms of the clinical outcome and healthcare costs. Frailty is becoming a popular, pervasive, and almost omnipresent concept in many different contexts, including clinical medicine, physical health, lifestyle behavior, mental health, health policy, and socio-economic planning sciences. The emergence of the new "science of frailty" has been recently acknowledged. However, there is still debate on the exact definition of frailty, the pathogenic mechanisms involved, the most appropriate method to assess frailty, and consequently, who should be considered frail. This narrative review aims to analyze frailty from many different aspects and points of view, with a special focus on the proposed pathogenic mechanisms, the various factors that have been considered in the assessment of frailty, and the emerging role of biomarkers in the early recognition of frailty, particularly on the role of mitochondria. According to the extensive literature on this topic, it is clear that frailty is a very complex syndrome, involving many different domains and affecting multiple physiological systems. Therefore, its management should be directed towards a comprehensive and multifaceted holistic approach and a personalized intervention strategy to slow down its progression or even to completely reverse the course of this condition.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Tapentadol Versus Oxycodone/Naloxone in both Branded and Generic Formulations in Patients with Musculoskeletal Pain.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Current evidence shows that tapentadol hydrochloride prolonged-release is more cost effective than other opioids. However, the introduction into the market of generic formulations of traditional comparators, leading to potential savings due to their lower price, creates space for further research. The objective of this study is to evaluate and compare the efficacy of tapentadol versus oxycodone/naloxone and the economic impact of the two alternatives in both branded and generic formulations. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using the third-payer perspective (TPP), with specific reference to the Italian National Health Service. A Markov model was implemented to simulate transitions between states, comparing two arms: The first arm simulated the administration of tapentadol, while the second simulated the administration of oxycodone/naloxone, both branded and generic. The results were reported in terms of net monetary benefit (NMB). The willingness to pay (WPT) was estimated at €35,000/quality-adjusted life year. RESULTS: Tapentadol was dominant in all scenarios, assuming a population of 1000 individuals over a 1-year time horizon. In all cases, although the prices of oxycodone/naloxone generic formulations were lower, the costs associated with treatment discontinuation were always higher than those associated with tapentadol. The comparison with the branded formulation of oxycodone/naloxone was associated with the highest savings of €431.77 per patient, and with the highest NMB of €1943.77 per patient. CONCLUSION: The results of this pharmacoeconomic evaluation promote the use of tapentadol in comparison with oxycodone/naloxone, confirming the results obtained in previous studies with reference to the generic formulations.

Acute Effects of Heat-Not-Burn, Electronic Vaping, and Traditional Tobacco Combustion Cigarettes: The Sapienza University of Rome-Vascular Assessment of Proatherosclerotic Effects of Smoking ( SUR - VAPES ) 2 Randomized Trial.

Background Little clinical research on new-generation heat-not-burn cigarettes ( HNBC ) in comparison with electronic vaping cigarettes ( EVC ) and traditional tobacco combustion cigarettes ( TC ) has been reported. We aimed to appraise the acute effects of single use of HNBC , EVC, and TC in healthy smokers. Methods and Results This was an independent, cross-over, randomized trial in 20 TC smokers, with allocation to different cycles of HNBC , EVC , and TC . All participants used all types of products, with an intercycle washout of 1 week. End points were oxidative stress, antioxidant reserve, platelet activation, flow-mediated dilation, blood pressure, and satisfaction scores. Single use of any product led to an adverse impact on oxidative stress, antioxidant reserve, platelet function, flow-mediated dilation, and blood pressure. HNBC had less impact than EVC and TC on soluble Nox2-derived peptide (respectively, P=0.004 and 0.001), 8-iso-prostaglandin F2α- III ( P=0.004 and <0.001), and vitamin E ( P=0.018 and 0.044). HNBC and EVC were equally less impactful than TCs on flow-mediated dilation ( P=0.872 for HNBC versus EVC ), H2O2 ( P=0.522), H2O2 breakdown activity ( P=0.091), soluble CD 40 ligand ( P=0.849), and soluble P-selectin ( P=0.821). The effect of HNBC and, to a lesser extent EVC , on blood pressure was less evident than that of TC , whereas HNBC appeared more satisfying than EVC (all P<0.05). Conclusions Acute effects of HNBC , EVC, and TC are different on several oxidative stress, antioxidant reserve, platelet function, cardiovascular, and satisfaction dimensions, with TCs showing the most detrimental changes in clinically relevant features. Clinical Trial Registration URL : http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 03301129.

Activity-based costing analysis of the analgesic treatments used in postoperative pain management in Italy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this analysis is to evaluate the costs of 72-hour postoperative pain treatment in patients undergoing major abdominal, orthopedic and thoracic procedures in nine different Italian hospitals, defined as the cumulative cost of drugs, consumable materials and time required for anesthesiologists, surgeons and nurses to administer each analgesic technique. METHODS: Nine Italian hospitals have been involved in this study through the administration of a questionnaire aimed to acquire information about the Italian clinical practice in terms of analgesia. This study uses activity-based costing (ABC) analysis to identify, measure and give value to the resources required to provide the therapeutic treatment used in Italy to manage the postoperative pain patients face after surgery. A deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA) has been performed to identify the cost determinants mainly affecting the final cost of each treatment analyzed. Costs have been reclassified according to three surgical macro-areas (abdominal, orthopedic and thoracic) with the aim to recognize the cost associated not only to the analgesic technique adopted but also to the type of surgery the patient faced before undergoing the analgesic pathway. RESULTS: Fifteen different analgesic techniques have been identified for the treatment of moderate to severe pain in patients who underwent a major abdominal, orthopedic or thoracic surgery. The cheapest treatment actually employed is the oral administration "around the clock" (€ 8.23), whilst the most expensive is continuous peripheral nerve block (€ 223.46). The intravenous patient-controlled analgesia costs € 277.63. In terms of resources absorbed, the non-continuous administration via bolus is the gold standard in terms of cost-related to the drugs used (€ 1.28), and when administered pro re nata it also absorbs the lowest amount of consumables (€0.58€) compared to all other therapies requiring a delivery device. The oral analgesic administration pro re nata is associated to the lowest cost in terms of health professionals involved (€ 6.25), whilst intravenous PCA is the most expensive one (€ 245.66), requiring a massive monitoring on the part of physicians and nurses. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis successfully collected information about costs of 72-hour postoperative pain treatment in patients undergoing major abdominal, orthopedic and thoracic procedures in all the nine different Italian hospitals. The interview showed high heterogeneity in the treatment of moderate to severe pain after major abdominal, orthopedic and thoracic surgeries among responding anesthesiologists, with 15 different analgesic modalities reported. The majority of the analgesic techniques considered in the analysis is not recommended by any guideline and their application in real life can be one of the reasons for the high incidence of uncontrolled pain, which is still reported in the postoperative period. Health care costs have become more and more important, although the choice of the best analgesic treatment should be a compromise between efficacy and economic considerations.

[Clinical and economical evaluation of new analgesics for the management of chronic pain]. / Valutazione clinica ed economica di nuovi analgesici per la gestione del dolore cronico.

The management of chronic pain still represent a challenge for physicians. Opioids are the main stem in the treatment of chronic severe pain, not only for their potency, but as they act as central drugs. The main limit to their utilization in clinical practice is the prevalence of side effects, in particular in the gastrointestinal tract, whose constipation represents the most common. Two new formulations are nowadays available on the market: tapentadol PR (TAP PR) and oxycodone/naloxone (OXN). A recent meta-analysis showed that both drugs have a better tolerability profile than a tradizional opioid, such as oxycodone CR (OXY CR), but TAP PR reduces by 47% (RR=0.53) the percentage of patients discontinuing treatment because of side effects, compared to 24% (RR=0.76) of OXN. A similar advantage has been reported in the reduction of the risk of developing nausea and/or vomiting: TAP PR reduces the risk by 47% (RR=0.53), while OXN reduces the risk by only by 10% (RR=0.90). Both drugs reduced by about 40% the risk of constipation (RR=0.61 for TAP PR and for OXN). These results have been recently confirmed by a direct comparison of the two formulations (TAP PR vs OXN) in patients with chronic low back pain with neuropathic component. Both drugs were reported to be effective in reducing pain intensity and neuropathic symptoms, however TAP PR resulted superior to OXN in terms of analgesic efficacy, quality of life, and tolerability, in particular regarding constipation and adherence to treatment. A pharmacoeconomic analysis can be useful to understand the costs of these clinical advantages, and can be done by using a probabilistic analisys and by populating a Markov model that simulates the transition in time of 100 patients through 4 different possible health states: 1) still on treatment; 2) presence of adverse events; 3) discontinuation; 4) death. Both treatments (TAP PR and OXN) have been shown to have an excellent cost-effectiveness profile. In the case of OXN, in one year, 0.29 QALYs were gained compared to the use of OXY CR at an additional cost of € 138 resulting in a cost per QALY gained of € 475 (€ 138/0.29). In the case of TAP PR, instead, 0.31 QALYs were gained with additional savings due to the reduction of drug side effects, hospitalizations and emergency department access. Therefore, the use of TAP PR implies an average saving of € 31.6 per patient. These data are the results of a pharmacoeconomic model and require a further validation in clinical practice.

Clinical and economic evaluation of tapentadol extended release and oxycodone/naloxone extended release in comparison with controlled release oxycodone in musculoskeletal pain.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic pain is a leading cause of disability and represents a relevant societal burden. Opioids are widely used for managing chronic non-cancer pain; however, the high incidence of side effects is often the main reason for discontinuation. Two formulations have recently been studied to improve the tolerability of opioids (tapentadol extended release [ER] and oxycodone/naloxone ER), but a direct comparison between these drugs is not available in the literature. The comparative cost effectiveness of these two drugs has not previously been assessed. The objective of this meta-analysis is a clinical and economic evaluation of tapentadol ER and oxycodone/naloxone ER for the treatment of musculoskeletal pain, by indirect comparison with controlled release (CR) oxycodone. METHODS: A structured literature review was conducted to identify published data for the health-economic model. The authors performed a meta-analysis on three selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for each treatment (tapentadol ER and oxycodone/naloxone ER). As measure of treatment effect, risk ratio was calculated, compared to the control active treatment (CR oxycodone), for the following outcomes: discontinuation rate due to adverse events, due to gastrointestinal (GE) side effects and central nervous system (CNS) side effects. A Markov model was developed to compare the cost effectiveness of tapentadol ER and oxycodone/naloxone ER. Four health states were defined: (1) patients still on treatment; (2) occurrence of adverse events (gastroenterology, central nervous system); (3) treatment discontinuation as consequence of ineffectiveness of treatment; and (4) treatment discontinuation as consequence of adverse events. RESULTS: Both drugs showed a significant clinical advantage over the active control, CR oxycodone; however, tapentadol ER resulted in a better risk ratio reduction for the primary outcome of discontinuation rate due to adverse events and for the secondary outcome nausea and vomiting. The two drugs gave equivalent results in the capacity of reduction of constipation risk. In the economic evaluation both interventions were cost effective compared with CR oxycodone. However, tapentadol ER showed the most favorable results as in 65% of cases it was less costly and produced a considerable quality adjusted life years (QALY) gain. The higher impact of tapentadol ER on the cost effectiveness results was probably due to the price and the lower incidence of adverse events and related discontinuation rate, resulting in a further economic advantage. CONCLUSION: Both tapentadol ER and oxycodone/naloxone ER are cost effective interventions compared with CR oxycodone; however, tapentadol ER was shown to provide better clinical outcomes at lower costs.

Managing chronic pain in elderly patients requires a CHANGE of approach.

In many countries, the number of elderly people has increased rapidly in recent years and this is expected to continue; it has been predicted that almost a quarter of the population in the European Union will be over 65 years of age in 2035. Many elderly people suffer from chronic pain but it is regularly under-treated, partly because managing these patients is often complex. This paper outlines the extent of untreated pain in this population and the consequent reduction in quality of life, before articulating the reasons why it is poorly or inaccurately diagnosed. These include the patient's unwillingness to complain, atypical pain presentations, multiple morbidities and cognitive decline. Successful pain management depends upon accurate diagnosis, which is based upon a complete history and thorough physical examination, as well as an assessment of psychosocial functioning. Poor physician/patient communication can be improved by using standardized instruments to establish individual treatment targets and measure progress towards them. User-friendly observational instruments may be valuable for patients with dementia. In line with the widely accepted biopsychosocial model of pain, a multidisciplinary approach to pain management is recommended, with pharmacotherapy, psychological support, physical rehabilitation and interventional procedures available if required. Declining organ function and other physiological changes require lower initial doses of analgesics and less frequent dosing intervals, and the physician must be aware of all medications that the patient is taking, in order to avoid drug/drug interactions. Non-adherence to treatment is common, and various strategies can be employed to improve it; involving the elderly patient's caregivers and family, using medication systems such as pill-boxes, or even sending text messages. In the long term, the teaching of pain medicine needs to be improved--particularly in the use of opioids--both at undergraduate level and after qualification.