The economic burden of Chagas disease: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Chagas disease (CD) is a neglected disease affecting millions worldwide, yet little is known about its economic burden. This systematic review is part of RAISE project, a broader study that aims to estimate the global prevalence, mortality, and health and economic burden attributable to chronic CD and Chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy. The objective of this study was to assess the main costs associated with the treatment of CD in both endemic and non-endemic countries. METHODS: An electronic search of the Medline, Lilacs, and Embase databases was conducted until 31st, 2022, to identify and select economic studies that evaluated treatment costs of CD. No restrictions on place or language were made. Complete or partial economic analyses were included. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included, with two-thirds referring to endemic countries. The most commonly investigated cost components were inpatient care, exams, surgeries, consultation, drugs, and pacemakers. However, significant heterogeneity in the estimation methods and presentation of data was observed, highlighting the absence of standardization in the measurement methods and cost components. The most common component analyzed using the same metric was hospitalization. The mean annual hospital cost per patient ranges from $25.47 purchasing power parity US dollars (PPP-USD) to $18,823.74 PPP-USD, and the median value was $324.44 PPP-USD. The lifetime hospital cost per patient varies from $209,44 PPP-USD for general care to $14,351.68 PPP-USD for patients with heart failure. DISCUSSION: Despite the limitations of the included studies, this study is the first systematic review of the costs of CD treatment. The findings underscore the importance of standardizing the measurement methods and cost components for estimating the economic burden of CD and improving the comparability of cost components magnitude and cost composition analysis. Finally, assessing the economic burden is essential for public policies designed to eliminate CD, given the continued neglect of this disease.

HBA1C point-of-care testing for diabetes control in a low-income population: A before and after study and cost-parity analysis HbA1c point-of-care testing for diabetes control.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the results of a program that offered access to HbA1c POC tests for the glycemic control of patients with diabetes in small and poor municipalities of Minas Gerais, Brazil. METHODS: Using a before and after study, we compared four groups: patients submitted to (i) POC tests; (ii) conventional tests; (iii) both tests; and (iv) neither test. The analysis considered three periods: before the program; before the pandemic; and during the pandemic. A cost comparison was conducted under the societal perspective and a cost-parity model was designed. RESULTS: 1349 patients previously diagnosed with diabetes were included in the analysis. The rate of consultations and the rate of HbA1c testing were significantly different between all periods and groups. Group iii had a much higher consultation and testing rate. The costs were around 89.45 PPP-USD for POC tests and between 32.44 and 54.66 PPP-USD for conventional tests. Cost-parity analysis suggests that the technology would be acceptable if the annual number of tests was between 247 and 771. CONCLUSION: Using POC devices improved access to HbA1c testing but not glycemic control. Even in small towns, the number of tests necessary to achieve cost-parity is low enough to enable their incorporation into the public health system.

Enough with the madness: a systematic review and meta-analysis of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 / Chega de loucura: uma revisão sistemática e metanálise de hidroxicloroquina para COVID-19

Objective: Because of preliminary results from in vitro studies, ydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) have been proposed as possible treatments for COVID-19, but the clinical evidence is discordant. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of CQ and HCQ for the treatment of COVID-19. Methods: A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. An electronic search was conducted in four databases for randomized controlled trials that compared HCQ or CQ with standard-of-care. A complementary search was performed. A quantitative synthesis of clinical outcomes was performed using the inverse variance method adjusting for a random-effects model. Results: In total, 16 studies were included. The meta-analysis found no significant difference between intervention and control groups in terms of mortality at the most extended follow-up (RR = 1.09, CI95% = 0.99-1.19, p-value = 0.08), patients with negative PCR results (RR = 0.99, CI95% = 0.89-1.10, p-value = 0.86), or serious adverse events (RR = 2.21, CI95% = 0.89-5.47, p-value = 0.09). HCQ was associated with an increased risk of adverse events (RR = 2.28, CI95% = 1.36-2.83, p-value < 0.01). The quality of evidence varied from very low to high. Conclusion: There is no evidence that HCQ reduces the risk of death or improves cure rates in patients with COVID-19, but it might be associated with an increased risk of adverse events

Objetivo: Devido aos resultados preliminares de estudos in vitro, a hidroxicloroquina (HCQ) e a cloroquina (CQ) foram propostas como possíveis tratamentos para a COVID-19, mas as evidências clínicas são discordantes. Este estudo tem como objetivo avaliar a segurança e a eficácia da CQ e HCQ no tratamento da COVID-19. Métodos: Foi realizada uma revisão sistemática com metanálise. Uma busca eletrônica foi realizada em quatro bancos de dados por ensaios clínicos randomizados que compararam a HCQ ou CQ com o tratamento-padrão. Uma busca complementar foi realizada. Uma síntese quantitativa dos resultados foi realizada usando o método de variância inversa para um modelo de efeitos aleatórios. Resultados: No total, 16 estudos foram incluídos. A metanálise não encontrou nenhuma diferença significativa entre os grupos de intervenção e controle em termos de mortalidade no acompanhamento mais longo (RR = 1,09, IC95% = 0,99-1,19, valor-p = 0,08), pacientes com resultados de PCR negativos (RR = 0,99, IC95% = 0,89-1,10, valor-p = 0,86) ou eventos adversos graves (RR = 2,21, IC95% = 0,89-5,47, valor-p = 0,09). HCQ foi associada a um risco aumentado de eventos adversos (RR = 2,28, IC95% = 1,36-2,83, valor-p < 0,01). A qualidade da evidência variou de muito baixa a alta. Conclusão: Não há evidências de que a HCQ reduza o risco de morte ou aumente a taxa de cura em pacientes com COVID-19, mas pode estar associada a um risco aumentado de eventos adversos

Cloroquina e hidroxicloroquina: uso off-label em processos judiciais no estado de Minas Gerais / Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine: off-label use in lawsuits in the State of Minas Gerais, Brazil / Cloroquina e hidroxicloroquina: uso fuera delo indicadoen demandas en el estado de Minas Gerais, Brasil

Objetivo: analisar os processos judiciais relacionados à cloroquina e hidroxicloroquina, segundo indicações e registros na Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (Anvisa), bem como nos Protocolos Clínicos e Diretrizes Terapêuticas (PCDT), considerando as doenças que motivaram os pleitos, sob o olhar da bioética para o uso off-label. Metodologia: estudo documental, exploratório-descritivo, transversal, quantitativo. Foram analisados os processos judiciais por hidroxicloroquina e cloroquina, nos últimos 20 anos em Minas Gerais. Realizou-se a análise descritiva, considerando as seguintes variáveis: doença; CID-10; medicamentos; ano de incorporação no componente especializado da assistência farmacêutica (CEAF); e ano da ação judicial. Foi utilizado o software SPSS® versão 19 na análise dos dados. Resultados: dos 155 processos analisados, 148 (95,5%) apresentaram demanda por hidroxicloroquina 400mg e 7 (4,5%) por cloroquina 250mg. Os medicamentos analisados possuíam registros na Anvisa e o uso off-label foi constatado em 8,1% para hidroxicloroquina e 14,3% para cloroquina. Discussão: as demandas judiciais para a hidroxicloroquina e cloroquina estiveram relacionadas às suas indicações registradas em bula e dentro dos PCDT. No entanto, a presença no estudo de seu uso off-label demonstrou que o Judiciário defere os pleitos, trazendo implicações bioéticas ao impactar nos princípios da autonomia, não maleficência, beneficência e justiça. Conclusão: a judicialização de medicamento off-label interfere no planejamento, execução e financiamento das políticas públicas de saúde, além de causar exposição do cidadão a riscos desconhecidos, ao utilizar medicamentos com indicações não amparadas pelas evidências científicas, pela Anvisa e pela própria indústria produtora do medicamento.

Objective: to analyze the lawsuits related to chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, according to indications and records at the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa) as well as in the Clinical Protocols and Therapeutic Guidelines (PCDT) considering the diseases that motivated the claims, under the view of the bioethics for off-label use. Methodology: documentary, exploratory-descriptive, transversal, quantitative study. The hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine lawsuits in the last 20 years in Minas Gerais were analyzed. Descriptive analysis was performed by considering the following variables: disease; ICD-10; medicines; year of incorporation into the specialized pharmaceutical assistance component (CEAF); and year of the lawsuit. SPSS® software version 19 was used to analyze the data. Results: the corpus of 155 processes analyzed, 148 (95.5%) presented demand for 400mg hydroxychloroquine and 7 (4.5%) for 250mg chloroquine. The analyzed drugs were registered with Anvisa and off-label use was found in 8.1% for hydroxychloroquine and 14.3% for chloroquine. Discussion: the judicial demands for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine were related to their indications registered in the package leaflet and within the PCDT. However, the presence in the study of its off-label use demonstrated that the Judiciary grants the claims, bringing bioethical implications by impacting the principles of autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice. Conclusion: the judicialization of off-label medicine interferes in the planning, execution and financing of public health policies, in addition to causing citizen exposure to unknown risks, when using medicines with indications not supported by scientific evidence, by Anvisa and by the production industry itself of the medicine.

Objetivo: analizar los juicios relacionados con la cloroquina y la hidroxicloroquina, de acuerdo con las indicaciones y registros de la Agencia Nacional de Vigilancia Sanitaria (Anvisa), así como en los Protocolos Clínicos y Guías Terapéuticas (PCDT), considerando las enfermedades que motivaron las reclamaciones, bajo la óptica de la bioética para uso no indicado en la etiqueta. Metodología: estudio documental, exploratorio-descriptivo, transversal, cuantitativo. Se analizaron los juicios de hidroxicloroquina y cloroquina de los últimos 20 años en Minas Gerais. Se realizó un análisis descriptivo, considerando las siguientes variables: enfermedad; ICD-10; medicamentos; año de incorporación al componente de asistencia farmacéutica especializada (CEAF); y año de la demanda. Se utilizó el software SPSS® versión 19 para analizar los datos. Resultados: de los 155 procesos analizados, 148 (95,5%) presentaron demanda de 400 mg de hidroxicloroquina y 7 (4,5%) de 250 mg de cloroquina. Los medicamentos analizados se registraron en Anvisa y el uso fuera de lo indicado se encontró en 8.1% para hidroxicloroquina y 14.3% para cloroquina. Discusión: las demandas judiciales de hidroxicloroquina y cloroquina estaban relacionadas con sus indicaciones registradas en el prospecto y dentro del PCDT. Sin embargo, la presencia en el estudio de su uso fuero de lo indicado demostró que el Poder Judicial otorga los reclamos, trayendo implicaciones bioéticas al incidir en los principios de autonomía, no maleficencia, beneficencia y justicia. Conclusión: la judicialización de los medicamentos fuera de lo indicdo interfiere en la planificación, ejecución y financiamiento de las políticas de salud pública, además de provocar la exposición ciudadana a riesgos desconocidos, al utilizar medicamentos con indicaciones no sustentadas en evidencia científica, por Anvisa y por la propia industria productora. de la medicina.

Rotational thromboelastometry in the perioperative period of cardiac surgeries: cost-effectiveness analysis and budget impact / Tromboelastometria rotacional no período perioperatório de cirurgias cardíacas: custo-efetividade e impacto orçamentário

Objective: The transfusion of blood components and blood products in cardiac surgery patients can be guided by protocols based on standard laboratory tests and/or clinical decisions (Standardof-Care, SOC) or viscoelastic haemostatic assays (VHA). The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of VHAs compared to SOC. Methods: A decision tree model was built in TreeAge Pro® 2009. Costs and benefits were taken from the medical literature. The costeffectiveness was evaluated in a base-case scenario and a worst-case scenario, considering low costs of adverse events. The budget impact was evaluated from data taken from Datasus. Cost data were measured in 2019 USD and outcomes were measured in QALYs. Results: VHAs were considered dominant in the base-case scenario and very cost-effective in the worst-case scenario (ICER = $ 1,083.21 USD/QALY). The budget impact analysis varied from a cost-saving result in the base-case scenario to a reasonable increase in cost in the worst-case scenario. Since the total market share of the technology is unlikely, a reasonable estimative for the base-case scenario and the worst-case scenario are about -$275 million USD and $132 million USD, respectively. Conclusion: We conclude that the VHAs are cost-effective and should be recommended for the use in the perioperative period of cardiac surgeries, especially for patients with a high risk of hemorrhage or coagulation problems.

Objetivo: A transfusão de sangue, hemocomponentes e produtos sanguíneos em pacientes submetidos a cirurgia cardíaca pode ser guiada por protocolos baseados em testes laboratoriais padrão e/ou decisão clínica (Standard-of-Care, SOC) ou testes viscoelásticos (TVEs). O objetivo deste estudo é avaliar o custo-efetividade e o impacto orçamentário dos TVEs em comparação com o SOC. Métodos: Um modelo de árvore de decisão foi construído em TreeAge Pro® 2009. Os parâmetros de custos e benefícios foram obtidos da literatura médica. A relação custo-efetividade foi avaliada em um cenário-base e no pior cenário, considerando baixos custos de eventos adversos. O impacto orçamentário foi avaliado a partir de dados extraídos do Datasus. Os custos foram avaliados em USD 2019 e os desfechos em AVAQs. Resultados: Os TVEs foram considerados dominantes no cenário-base e muito custo-efetivos no pior cenário avaliado (RCEI = 1.083,21 USD/QALY). A análise de impacto orçamentário variou de um resultado de economia de custos no cenário-base a um aumento razoável no custo no pior cenário. Como a hipótese de que a tecnologia será adotada para toda a demanda do mercado é improvável, estimativas razoáveis para o cenário-base e o pior cenário são de aproximadamente -275 milhões de USD e 132 milhões de USD, respectivamente. Conclusão: Concluímos que os VHAs são econômicos e devem ser recomendados para uso no período perioperatório de cirurgias cardíacas, principalmente para pacientes com alto risco de problemas de hemorragia ou coagulação.

Silicone tape versus micropore tape to prevent medical adhesive-related skin injuries: systematic review and meta-analysis / Fita de silicone versus fita microporosa para prevenção de lesão cutânea relacionada a adesivos médicos: revisão sistemática e metanálise

Objective: This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of silicone tapes compared to microporous tapes in patients with fragile skin. Methods: A systematic review of the scientific literature was carried out. Clinical trials that compared silicone tape for medical use with the microporous tape in preterm newborns, newborns, children, elders, or people with increased risk of MARSI were included. This report followed the principles of the PRISMA statement. Results: Three randomized controlled trials were included. The silicone tape was associated with fewer injuries (RR = 0.53; p-value = 0.03), but no difference was found in terms of prevention of moderate or severe injuries (RR = 0.25; p-value = 0.20). Silicone tapes produce significantly less edema/erythema response than microporous tapes in children (MD = -0.42; p-value < 0.0001). The quality of evidence was considered very low. Conclusion: The evidence suggests that silicone tapes may be gentler to patients' skin than microporous tapes. However, no study reported data on the outcomes of interest. The studies have small samples, a short time horizon, and the quality of evidence was considered very low. There is insufficient information to allow the recommendation of silicone tapes to prevent skin injuries compared to microporous tapes.

Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo é avaliar a eficácia e a segurança das fitas de silicone comparadas às fitas microporosas em pacientes com pele frágil. Métodos: Uma revisão sistemática da literatura foi conduzida. Ensaios clínicos que compararam a fita de silicone para uso médico com a fita microporosa em pacientes prematuros, neonatos, crianças, idosos ou pessoas com risco aumentado de lesão por adesivos médicos foram incluídos. Esse relato seguiu os princípios do relatório PRISMA. Resultados: Três ensaios clínicos randomizados foram incluídos. As fitas de silicone foram associadas a menor risco de lesões (RR = 0,53; valor-p = 0,03), mas não foi observada diferença em termos de lesões moderadas ou graves (RR = 0,25; valor-p = 0,20), e produziram significativamente menos edema/eritema que fitas microporosas em crianças (MD = -0,42; valor-p < 0,0001). A qualidade da evidência foi considerada baixa. Conclusão: A evidência sugere que as fitas de silicone são mais gentis à pele dos pacientes que as fitas microporosas. No entanto, nenhum estudo incluído reportou dados sobre os desfechos de interesse. Os estudos tinham amostras pequenas, horizonte temporal curto e qualidade de evidência muito baixa. A informação existente é insuficiente para possibilitar a recomendação das fitas de silicone para prevenção de lesões cutâneas em comparação com as fitas microporosas.

The Price of Substitute Technologies.

BACKGROUND: Only a small share of new drugs is truly innovative; 85% to 90% of all new health technologies have little or no advantage over existing therapeutic alternatives. Health economic evaluations can be used to induce acceptable prices for new technologies through threshold pricing. OBJECTIVE: This work discusses a cost-effectiveness threshold (λ) to be applied to the price regulation of substitute technologies. METHODS: Considering that substitute technologies add only small marginal benefits in terms of innovation or ethical considerations to the system, it does not make sense to allow a loss of efficiency to list them. It has been postulated that the threshold calculated from opportunity costs (κ) represents its maximum possible value and that there must be a threshold (ß) that maximizes consumer surplus. For a substitute technology to be listed, the cost of treatment associated with it must be lower than the cost of treatment of the incumbent technology added to the difference in effectiveness priced at the threshold. RESULTS: There is no reason for us to believe that the oligopolistic pharmaceutical market is currently charging prices at the cost of production. That way, the cost-effectiveness ratio of the incumbent technology, when lower than κ, is shown through a deductive process to be a plausible estimate for λ that fulfills the objective of maximizing consumer benefit, granting producers a part of the combined surplus to stimulate research and development; that is, it would be between ß and κ. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the price of substitute technologies should be limited by the cost-effectiveness ratio of the incumbent technology.

Colangiopancreatografia retrógrada endoscópica para cálculos no ducto biliar comum: overview de revisões sistemáticas e estudos econômicos / Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for common bile duct calculi: overview of systematic reviews and economic assessments

Objetivo: Avaliar a eficácia, segurança e custo-efetividade da colangiopancreatografia retrógrada endoscópica (CPRE) comparada à exploração laparoscópica do ducto biliar comum (ELDBC) para coledocolitíase. Métodos: Foi realizada uma busca eletrônica nas bases de dados Medline, The Cochrane Library, Lilacs e Center for Reviews and Dissemination por revisões sistemáticas e estudos econômicos que reportassem dados sobre a comparação entre a CPRE e a ELDBC em pacientes com coledocolitíase. Uma busca complementar foi realizada nas referências dos estudos incluídos, periódicos, resumos de congresso e Google Acadêmico. A seleção foi realizada por dois pesquisadores independentes. Além da síntese qualitativa, uma ressíntese quantitativa para os desfechos primários foi conduzida em Review Manager® 5.3 utilizando um modelo de efeitos randômicos. Resultados: Foram incluídos 15 estudos (9 revisões sistemáticas e 6 estudos econômicos). Não foi demonstrada diferença estatisticamente significativa entre a colecistectomia laparoscópica (CL)+CPRE e a CL+ELDBC em termos de remoção dos cálculos do colédoco (88,5% vs. 92,8%; RR = 0,97, valor-p = 0,08; N = 1.881), morbidade pós-operatória (14,1% vs. 13,8%; RR = 0,98, valor-p = 0,88; N = 1.469), mortalidade (0,8% vs. 0,2%; RR = 2,13, valor-p = 0,33; N = 1.471), cálculos retidos (7,3% vs. 5,8%; RR = 1,17, valor-p = 0,40; N = 1.731), conversão para outros procedimentos (8,7% vs. 6,7%; RR = 1,20, valor-p = 0,55; N = 1.287), duração do procedimento (MD = 10,91, valor-p = 0,61; N = 717) ou tempo de hospitalização (MD = 1,31, valor-p = 0,10; N = 757). A literatura de custo-efetividade é dividida, com alguns estudos favorecendo a CL+CPRE e outros, a CL+ELDBC. Conclusão: Não é possível concluir sobre a superioridade da ELDBC sobre a CPRE ou vice-versa para a remoção de cálculos no colédoco.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) compared to laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for choledocholithiasis. Methods: An electronic search was conducted in the Medline, The Cochrane Library, Lilacs and Center for Reviews and Dissemination databases for systematic reviews and economic studies that reported data on the comparison between ERCP and LCBDE in patients with choledocholithiasis. A complementary search was conducted on references of included studies, journals, conference abstracts and Google Scholar. The selection was performed by two independent reviewers. In addition to the qualitative synthesis, a quantitative re-synthesis for primary outcomes was conducted in Review Manager® 5.3 using a random effects model. Results: Fifteen studies (9 systematic reviews and 6 economic studies) were included. There was no statistically significant difference between laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC)+ERCP and LC+LCBDE in terms of removal of choledochal stones (88.5% vs. 92.8%, RR = 0.97, p-value = 0.08; N = 1,881), morbidity (14.1% vs. 13.8%, RR = 0.98, p-value = 0.88; N = 1,469), mortality (0.8% vs. 0,2%; RR = 2.13, p-value = 0.33, N = 1,471), retained stones (7.3% vs. 5.8%, RR = 1.17, p-value = 0.40; N = 1,731), conversion to other procedures (8.7% vs. 6.7%, RR = 1.20, p-value = 0.55, N = 1,287), duration of the procedure (MD = 10.91, p = 0.61, N = 717) or hospital stay (MD = 1.31, p-value = 0.10, N = 757). The cost-effectiveness literature is divided. Some studies favor LC+ERCP and others LC+LCBDE. Conclusion: It is not possible to conclude on the superiority of the LCBDE on ERCP or vice-versa for choledocholithiasis

Cost-effectiveness thresholds: methods for setting and examples from around the world.

INTRODUCTION: Cost-effectiveness thresholds (CETs) are used to judge if an intervention represents sufficient value for money to merit adoption in healthcare systems. The study was motivated by the Brazilian context of HTA, where meetings are being conducted to decide on the definition of a threshold. AREAS COVERED: An electronic search was conducted on Medline (via PubMed), Lilacs (via BVS) and ScienceDirect followed by a complementary search of references of included studies, Google Scholar and conference abstracts. Cost-effectiveness thresholds are usually calculated through three different approaches: the willingness-to-pay, representative of welfare economics; the precedent method, based on the value of an already funded technology; and the opportunity cost method, which links the threshold to the volume of health displaced. An explicit threshold has never been formally adopted in most places. Some countries have defined thresholds, with some flexibility to consider other factors. An implicit threshold could be determined by research of funded cases. EXPERT COMMENTARY: CETs have had an important role as a 'bridging concept' between the world of academic research and the 'real world' of healthcare prioritization. The definition of a cost-effectiveness threshold is paramount for the construction of a transparent and efficient Health Technology Assessment system.

Economic evaluation of antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia: a systematic review / Avaliação econômica de antipsicóticos para o tratamento da esquizofrenia: uma revisão sistemática

Objective: The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review on cost-effectiveness analysis of oral antipsychotic agents to identify the trend of cost-effectiveness of drugs available for the treatment of schizophrenia. Methods: A search was conducted in three databases (MEDLINE, LILACS and PsycINFO) for head-to-head economic comparisons of antipsychotic agents. A manual search in journals, dissertations and theses databases, congresses abstracts and the Cochrane Library was also conducted to ensure comprehensiveness. After evaluation by independent reviewers, complete economic evaluations of oral antipsychotic medications were included in the final analysis. Results: Twenty four studies were included in the final analysis. The trend observed in the pooled studies showed that risperidone, olanzapine and clozapine were the most cost-effective drugs included to treat schizophrenia. Aripiprazole and haloperidol were considered comparable to quetiapine or ziprasidone and less cost-effective than olanzapine and risperidone in the pooled analysis. After removal of comparisons that had sponsored drugs included, risperidone, olanzapine and clozapine were still considered the most cost-effective strategies to treat schizophrenia. The analysis of only cost-utility studies shows approximately the same results of the other analysis. Conclusions: An analysis that consider first- vs. second-generation antipsychotics polled together might be biased by the different profiles of the specific drugs, not considering the heterogeneity of the group of second-generation antipsychotics. There seems to be a difference in the cost-effectiveness profiles between specific antipsychotic drugs. Risperidone, olanzapine and clozapine seem to be the drugs most considered cost-effective to treat schizophrenia. This result was robust to changes in funding.

Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo é conduzir uma revisão sistemática de custo-efetividade de antipsicóticos orais para identificar uma tendência de custo-efetividade dos medicamentos disponí- veis para o tratamento da esquizofrenia. Métodos: Uma busca eletrônica foi realizada nas bases de dados Medline (via PubMed), Lilacs (via VS) e PsycINFO para avaliações econômicas comparando head-to-head medicamentos antipsicóticos para esquizofrenia. Uma busca manual complementar foi realizada para garantir abrangência. Resultados: Depois da avaliação por revisores independentes, 24 avaliações econômicas completas de antipsicóticos orais para esquizofrenia foram incluídas na análise final. A tendência observada no conjunto dos estudos mostrou que a risperidona, a olanzapina e a clozapina foram mais comumente consideradas os medicamentos mais custo-efetivos para esquizofrenia. Aripiprazol e olanzapina foram considerados comparáveis a quetiapina ou ziprasidona e menos custo-efetivos, no geral, que olanzapina e risperidona. Após a remoção das comparações que incluíam medicamentos dos patrocinadores dos estudos, a mesma tendência foi observada. A análise apenas de estudos de custo-utilidade mostra o mesmo padrão. Conclusões: Análises que consideram medicamentos de primeira e segunda geração agrupados podem trazer vieses por conta da heterogeneidade entre medicamentos específicos. Parece haver uma diferença de custo-efetividade entre os medicamentos. Risperidona, olanzapina e clozapina são mais comumente consideradas custo-efetivas. Esse resultado foi robusto a mudanças no financiamento.

Hospitalization of schizophrenic patients in the public health system of Minas Gerais, Brazil / Hospitalização de pacientes esquizofrênicos no Sistema Único de Saúde em Minas Gerais, Brasil

Objectives: The aim of this study was to describe the socio-demographic and clinical variables, identify the determinants of length of stay and estimate the cost of inpatient treatment of schizophrenia in Minas Gerais, Brazil. Methods: A non-concurrent cohort was conducted in three psychiatric hospitals of Minas Gerais, Brazil. The data was collected from patients' records in loco. The association between dependent and independent variables was evaluated via linear regression. The costs were calculated through an absorption costing method. Results: 1,928 patients that met the inclusion criteria were identified. Most patients were male, had no life partner, studied no more than the middle school, had no occupation and lived in the city of hospital assistance. Haloperidol was the most prescribed antipsychotic drug. Risperidone was the most used second-generation antipsychotic, followed by olanzapine. Average length of stay was 30.3 days (SD = 37.5 days) and the median was 20 days. Female patients, living in cities other than the hospital's, with involuntary or mandatory hospitalizations and in use of a second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) and a first-generation antipsychotic (FGA) were associated to a longer length of stay. Average cost of hospitalization was R$ 11,713.07 (US$ 5,300.03) per hospitalization. Our results were corroborated by literature data. Conclusion: We found that most schizophrenic inpatients were male, single, had a low educational level and no occupational activity. The longer length of stay was associated to the socio-demographic and clinical variables, sex, place of residence, willingness to hospitalization of the patient and antipsychotic use

Objetivos: O objetivo deste estudo foi descrever as características sociodemográficas e clínicas, identificar os determinantes do tempo de permanência hospitalar e estimar o custo do tratamento hospitalar de pacientes com esquizofrenia em Minas Gerais, Brasil. Métodos: Uma coorte não concorrente foi conduzida em três instituições psiquiátricas de Minas Gerais, Brasil. Dados foram coletados dos prontuários dos pacientes in loco. A associação entre variáveis dependentes e independentes foi avaliada por meio de regressão linear. Os custos foram calculados por um método de Custeio de Absorção. Resultados: 1.928 pacientes foram incluídos no estudo. A maior parte deles era do sexo masculino, não tinha companheiro de vida, estudou até o ensino fundamental, não tinha ocupação e vivia na cidade em que receberam atenção hospitalar. Haloperidol foi o antipsicótico mais prescrito. Risperidona foi o antipsicótico atípico mais utilizado, seguido pela olanzapina. O tempo médio de hospitalização foi de 30,3 dias (DP = 37,5 dias) e a mediana, de 20 dias. Pacientes do sexo feminino, vivendo em cidades diferentes de onde receberam atenção hospitalar, em hospitalização involuntária ou mandatória e em uso de antipsicóticos típicos e atípicos, foram associados a tempos de internação mais longos. O custo médio de hospitalização foi de R$ 11,713.07 (US$ 5,300.03) por hospitalização. Os resultados concordam com dados da literatura. Conclusão: A maior parte dos pacientes com esquizofrenia internados nas instituições avaliadas era do sexo masculino, solteira, tinha baixo nível educacional e não tinha ocupação. O tempo de permanência mais longo foi associado às variáveis sociodemográficas e clínicas, sexo, local de residência, tipo de hospitalização quanto à voluntariedade e o uso de antipsicóticos.

Cost-effectiveness of atypical antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia / Custo-efetividade de antipsicóticos atípicos para o tratamento da esquizofrenia

Objectives: To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) for schizophrenia in Brazil. Methods: A Markov model was built for the evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of risperidone, quetiapine, ziprasidone and olanzapine in the Brazilian public health system. The time horizon of the analysis was 18 months. The effectiveness was measured in terms of discontinuation of treatment for any cause and the costs were measured in 2014 BRL and USD. Results: Olanzapine was found to be dominant over the other strategies. The analysis of the optimal choice indicated that olanzapine was recommended, considering a null Willingness-to-Pay (WTP), in 51.8% of the trials. The increase in values of WTP makes the chance of olanzapine to be optimal increase, achieving 100% at approximately 252.00 BRL (114.03 USD) per month of effective treatment. The Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis (PSA), has shown olanzapine to be optimal in 49.6% of the trials, considering a null WTP. The chance of optimality of olanzapine achieved 100% at a WTP of 364,00 BRL (164.71 USD) per month of effective treatment. The results have shown the importance of prescription costs of olanzapine and hospitalization costs for the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER). Conclusion: Olanzapine was found to be dominant over risperidone, quetiapine and ziprasidone, in Brazil. The sensitivity analysis has shown that the cost-effectiveness relationship between olanzapine and risperidone can be modified by the price of purchase of olanzapine. Due to the low values of ICER showed in the sensitivity analysis and PSA, olanzapine can be considered the most cost-effective strategy evaluated.

Objetivos: Este estudo realizou uma análise de custo-efetividade entre antipsicóticos de segunda geração (SGA) para a esquizofrenia no Brasil. Métodos: Foi construído um modelo de Markov baseado na prática clínica, dados de literatura e bases de dados governamentais, comparando custos e efetividade da risperidona, quetiapina, ziprasidona e olanzapina no sistema público de saúde do Brasil. O horizonte temporal da análise foi 18 meses. O desfecho utilizado para avaliação da efetividade foi a descontinuação do tratamento por qualquer causa e os custos foram medidos em BRL e USD (2014). Resultados: A olanzapina foi considerada dominante sobre as outras estratégias avaliadas. A análise indicou que a olanzapina foi considerada ótima, com disposição a pagar (WTP) nula, em 51,8% dos ensaios. O aumento progressivo dos valores de WTP eleva a chance de a olanzapina ser considerada ótima, alcançando 100% em cerca de 252.00 BRL (114,03 USD) por mês deantiptratamento efetivo. Na Análise de Sensibilidade Probabilística (PSA), a olanzapina foi considerada ótima em 49,6% dos ensaios, considerando WTP nula. A chance de a olanzapina ser a escolha ótima atingiu 100% em um WTP de 364,00 BRL (164.71 USD) por mês de tratamento efetivo. Os resultados mostram a importância dos custos de prescrição da olanzapina e de hospitalização para a Razão de Custo-Efetividade Incremental (RCEI). Conclusão: A olanzapina mostrou-se dominante quando comparada a risperidona, quetiapina e ziprasidona, no Brasil. Devido aos baixos valores de RCEI encontrados na análise de sensibilidade e PSA, a olanzapina pode ser considerada a estratégia mais custo-efetiva avaliada.