The SMILe integrated care model in allogeneic SteM cell TransplantatIon faciLitated by eHealth: a protocol for a hybrid effectiveness-implementation randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: While effectiveness outcomes of eHealth-facilitated integrated care models (eICMs) in transplant and oncological populations are promising, implementing and sustaining them in real-world settings remain challenging. Allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT) patients could benefit from an eICM to enhance health outcomes. To combat health deterioration, integrating chronic illness management, including continuous symptom and health behaviour monitoring, can shorten reaction times. We will test the 1st-year post-alloSCT effectiveness and evaluate bundled implementation strategies to support the implementation of a newly developed and adapted eICM in allogeneic stem cell transplantation facilitated by eHealth (SMILe-ICM). SMILe-ICM has been designed by combining implementation, behavioural, and computer science methods. Adaptions were guided by FRAME and FRAME-IS. It consists of four modules: 1) monitoring & follow-up; 2) infection prevention; 3) physical activity; and 4) medication adherence, delivered via eHealth and a care coordinator (an Advanced Practice Nurse). The implementation was supported by contextually adapted implementation strategies (e.g., creating new clinical teams, informing local opinion leaders). METHODS: Using a hybrid effectiveness-implementation randomised controlled trial, we will include a consecutive sample of 80 adult alloSCT patients who were transplanted and followed by University Hospital Basel (Switzerland). Inclusion criteria are basic German proficiency; elementary computer literacy; internet access; and written informed consent. Patients will be excluded if their condition prevents the use of technology, or if they are followed up only at external centres. Patient-level (1:1) stratified randomisation into a usual care group and a SMILe-ICM group will take place 10 days pre-transplantation. To gauge the SMILe-ICM's effectiveness primary outcome (re-hospitalisation rate), secondary outcomes (healthcare utilization costs; length of inpatient re-hospitalizations, medication adherence; treatment and self-management burden; HRQoL; Graft-versus-Host Disease rate; survival; overall survival rate) and implementation outcomes (acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity), we will use multi-method, multi-informant assessment (via questionnaires, interviews, electronic health record data, cost capture methods). DISCUSSION: The SMILe-ICM has major innovative potential for reengineering alloSCT follow-up care, particularly regarding short- and medium-term outcomes. Our dual focus on implementation and effectiveness will both inform optimization of the SMILe-ICM and provide insights regarding implementation strategies and pathway, understudied in eHealth-facilitated ICMs in chronically ill populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov. Identifier: NCT04789863 . Registered April 01, 2021.

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) post-percutaneous coronary intervention: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians must balance the risks of bleeding and thrombosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in people with an indication for anticoagulation. The potential of non-vitamin K antagonists (NOACs) to prevent bleeding complications is promising, but evidence remains limited. OBJECTIVES: To review the evidence from randomised controlled trials assessing the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared to vitamin K antagonists post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in people with an indication for anticoagulation. SEARCH METHODS: We identified studies by searching CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science and two clinical trials registers in February 2019. We checked bibliographies of identified studies and applied no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCT) that compared NOACs and vitamin K antagonists for people with an indication for anticoagulation who underwent PCI. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently checked the results of searches to identify relevant studies, assessed each included study, and extracted study data. We conducted random-effects, pairwise analyses using Review Manager 5 and network meta-analyses (NMA) using the R package 'netmeta'. We ranked competing treatments by P scores, which are derived from the P values of all pairwise comparisons, and allow ranking of treatments on a continuous 0 to 1 scale. MAIN RESULTS: We identified nine RCTs that met the inclusion criteria, but four were ongoing trials, and were not included in this analysis. We included five RCTs, with 8373 participants, in the NMA (two RCTs compared apixaban to a vitamin K antagonist, two RCTs compared rivaroxaban to a vitamin K antagonist, and one RCT compared dabigatran to a vitamin K antagonist). Very low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggests little or no difference between NOACs and vitamin K antagonists in death from cardiovascular causes (not reported in the dabigatran trial), myocardial infarction, stroke, death from any cause, and stent thrombosis. Apixaban (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.95), high dose rivaroxaban (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.00), and low dose rivaroxaban (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.92) probably reduce the risk of recurrent hospitalisation compared with vitamin K antagonists. No studies looked at health-related quality of life. Very low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggests that NOACs may be safer than vitamin K antagonists in terms of bleeding. Both high dose dabigatran (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.97), and low dose dabigatran (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.70) may reduce major bleeding more than vitamin K antagonists. High dose dabigatran (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96), low dose dabigatran (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.75), apixaban (RR 0,67 , 95% Cl 0.51 to 0.88), high dose rivaroxaban (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.83), and low dose rivaroxaban (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.88) probably reduce non-major bleeding more than vitamin K antagonists. The results from the NMA were inconclusive between the different NOACs for all primary and secondary outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Very low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggests no meaningful difference in efficacy outcomes between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) and vitamin K antagonists following percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in people with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. NOACs probably reduce the risk of recurrent hospitalisation for adverse events compared with vitamin K antagonists. Low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggests that dabigatran may reduce the rates of major and non-major bleeding, and apixaban and rivaroxaban probably reduce the rates of non-major bleeding compared with vitamin K antagonists. Our network meta-analysis did not show superiority of one NOAC over another for any of the outcomes. Head to head trials, directly comparing NOACs against each other, are required to provide more certain evidence.

Endovascular treatment of cerebral vasospasm after subarachnoid hemorrhage: More is more.

OBJECTIVE: Delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) is strongly associated with poor outcome after subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). Cerebral vasospasm is a major contributor to DCI and requires special attention. To evaluate the effect of vasospasm management on SAH outcome, we performed a pooled analysis of 2 observational SAH cohorts. MATERIALS: Data from 2 institutional databases with consecutive patients with SAH treated between 2005 and 2012 were pooled. The effect of 2 institutional standards of conservative and endovascular vasospasm treatment (EVT) on the rates of DCI (new cerebral infarcts not visible on the post-treatment imaging) and unfavorable outcome (modified Rankin Scale score >2) at 6 months follow-up was analyzed. RESULTS: The final analysis included 1,057 patients with SAH. There was no difference regarding demographic (age and sex), clinical (Hunt & Hess grades, acute hydrocephalus, treatment modality, and infections), and radiographic (Fisher grades and aneurysm location) characteristics of the populations. However, there was a significant difference in the rate (24.4% [121/495] vs 14.4% [81/562], p < 0.0001) and timing (first treatment on day 6 vs 8.9 after SAH, p < 0.0001) of EVT. The rates of DCI (20.8% vs 29%, p = 0.0001) and unfavorable outcome (44% vs 50.6%, p = 0.04) were lower in the cohort with more frequent and early EVT. Multivariate analysis confirmed independent effect of EVT standard on DCI risk and outcome. CONCLUSIONS: A preventive strategy utilizing frequent and early EVT seems to reduce the risk of DCI in patients with SAH and improve their functional outcome. We recommend prospective evaluation of the value of preventive EVT strategy on SAH. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that for patients with SAH, a frequent and early EVT to treat vasospasm reduces the risk of DCI and improves functional outcome.

Evaluation of a possible predictor for Federal Joint Committee decisions on early benefit assessments according to the German act on the reform of the market for medicinal products.

OBJECTIVES: As of 1st January 2011 the German drug market is regulated by the act on the reform of the market for medicinal products (AMNOG). Since then the normal procedure for reimbursement of a new pharmaceutical is a benefit assessment by the joint federal committee (G-BA) which determines one of six additional benefit levels. METHODS: In order to evaluate a possible predictor of G-BA decisions, the 'evaluation of pharmaceutical innovations (EVITA)' score was calculated for 40 out of 63 dossiers and compared with published G-BA appraisals. RESULTS: Univariate ordinary least squares (p<0.001) and ordered logit regression (p=0.008) analyses show statistically significant correlations between EVITA scores and the G-BA additional benefit levels. Moreover, for the prediction of an additional benefit level of at least 'minor', an EVITA score cutpoint of ≥3 is associated with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 80%. For the prediction of an additional benefit level of at least 'considerable', an EVITA score cutpoint of ≥7.5 is associated with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 93.1%. CONCLUSION: The present investigation indicates that the EVITA score may have some potential to act as a possible predictor of G-BA decisions related to AMNOG early benefit assessments.