RESUMEN
Objective: To evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on first and follow-up visits for cancer outpatients. Methods: This is a multicenter retrospective observational study involving three Comprehensive Cancer Care Centers (CCCCs): IFO, including IRE and ISG in Rome, AUSL-IRCCS of Reggio Emilia, and IRCCS Giovanni Paolo II in Bari) and one oncology department in a Community Hospital (Saint'Andrea Hospital, Rome). From 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2021, we evaluated the volume of outpatient consultations (first visits and follow-up), comparing them with the pre-pandemic year (2019). Results were analyzed by quarter according to the Rt (real-time indicator used to assess the evolution of the pandemic). IFO and IRCCS Giovanni Paolo II were "COVID-free" while AUSL-IRCCS RE was a "COVID-mixed" Institute. Depending on the Rt, Sain't Andrea Hospital experienced a "swinging" organizational pathway (COVID-free/ COVID-mixed). Results: Regarding the "first appointments", in 2020 the healthcare facilities operating in the North and Center of Italy showed a downward trend. In 2021, only AUSL-IRCCS RE showed an upward trend. Regarding the "follow-up", only AUSL IRCCS RE showed a slight up-trend in 2020. In 2021, IFO showed an increasing trend, while S. Andrea Hospital showed a negative plateau. Surprisingly, IRCCS Giovanni Paolo II in Bari showed an uptrend for both first appointment and follow-ups during pandemic and late pandemic except for the fourth quarter of 2021. Conclusions: During the first pandemic wave, no significant difference was observed amongst COVID-free and COVID-mixed Institutes and between CCCCs and a Community Hospital. In 2021 ("late pandemic year"), it has been more convenient to organize COVID-mixed pathway in the CCCCs rather than to keep the Institutions COVID-free. A swinging modality in the Community Hospital did not offer positive results in term of visit volumes. Our study about the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on visit volume in cancer outpatients may help health systems to optimize the post-pandemic use of resources and improve healthcare policies.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Pacientes Ambulatorios , Pandemias , Política de Salud , Hospitales Comunitarios , Neoplasias/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of new reimbursement decisions for palivizumab treatment on respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) hospitalisations and the concomitant number of palivizumab prescriptions for infants aged <2 years. DESIGN: We compared the RSV hospitalisation rates in infants before and after implementation of new limitations during three RSV seasons 2014-2017. SETTING: Population aged <2 years at the beginning of each RSV seasons extracted from regional health systems (Lazio region, 2016, 5 898 124 inhabitants and 47 595 births). PATIENTS: Out of 70 323 infants, 5895 (8.4%) premature babies (gestational age (GA) <37 weeks) were followed before-after Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA)-2016 limitations. INTERVENTION: In 2016, AIFA, following the American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines, decided to limit coverage of palivizumab prophylaxis (GA ≤29 weeks). MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Trend of hospitalisations by months and rate of RSV before-after new restrictions were analysed. Palivizumab prescriptions and costs for National Health Service (NHS) were considered. RESULTS: In a population of 284 902 aged <2 years, the number of hospitalisations due to RSV infection was 1729. Following AIFA-2016 limitations, a reduction in the number of RSV infection-based hospitalisations from 6.3/1000 (95% CI 6.0 to 6.7) to 5.5/1000 (95% CI 5.0 to 5.9) was observed. Palivizumab showed a concomitant reduction of 48% in the number of prescriptions (saving 750 000 for the NHS). No differences of GA, age on admission or severity of RSV infection were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the new palivizumab reimbursement criteria was not associated with an increase in the RSV hospitalisation rate for children aged <2 years despite a significant reduction in the number of palivizumab prescriptions.
Asunto(s)
Antivirales/economía , Utilización de Medicamentos/tendencias , Hospitalización/tendencias , Reembolso de Seguro de Salud , Palivizumab/economía , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio/prevención & control , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Costos de los Medicamentos/tendencias , Utilización de Medicamentos/economía , Femenino , Hospitalización/economía , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Italia/epidemiología , Masculino , Programas Nacionales de Salud/economía , Programas Nacionales de Salud/normas , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Palivizumab/uso terapéutico , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/economía , Prevalencia , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio/economía , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio/epidemiología , Infecciones por Virus Sincitial Respiratorio/terapiaRESUMEN
Natalizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody with a selective adhesion-molecule inhibitor effect, and a demonstrated efficacy in decreasing the frequency of relapses and progression of disability in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RR MS). After the approval of FDA and EMEA in MS cases unresponsive to immunomodulating therapy or in severe MS patients also not previously treated with interferons, and considering the concern on the possible side effects, an accurate program of surveillance was organized in our country by a combined effort of AIFA, Cineca, Department of Pharmacology of University of Bologna, and a group of neurologists appointed by the National Society of Neurology (SIN). After 15 months from the authorization of natalizumab therapy in MS, as of 31 March 2008, 908 cases have been treated with natalizumab and enrolled in this pharmaco-vigilance study. The mean age is 35 years, while the duration of disease is longer and disability is higher than that reported in the registrative study. Side effects are at the moment mild and similar to those previously described. At follow-up, the majority of treated cases are stable or ameliorated. The treatment was discontinued in 6% of patients.