Cost Effectiveness of Advanced Pharmacy Services Provided in the Community and Primary Care Settings: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacists working in community and primary care are increasingly developing advanced skills to provide enhanced services, particularly in dealing with minor acute illness. These services can potentially free-up primary care physicians' time; however, it is not clear whether they are sufficiently cost effective to be recommended for wider provision in the UK. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to review published economic evaluations of enhanced pharmacy services in the community and primary care settings. METHODS: We undertook a systematic review of economic evaluations of enhanced pharmacy services to inform NICE guidelines for emergency and acute care. The review protocol was developed and agreed with the guideline committee. The National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, Health Technology Assessment Database, Health Economic Evaluations Database, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched in December 2016 and the search was updated in March 2018. Studies were assessed for applicability and methodological quality using the NICE Economic Evaluation Checklist. RESULTS: Of 3124 records, 13 studies published in 14 papers were included. The studies were conducted in the UK, Spain, The Netherlands, Australia, Italy and Canada. Settings included community pharmacies, primary care/general practice surgeries and patients' homes. Most of the studies were assessed as partially applicable with potentially serious limitations. Services provided in community and primary care settings were found to be either dominant or cost effective, at a £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year threshold, compared with usual care. Those delivered in the patient's home were not found to be cost effective. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced pharmacy services appear to be cost effective when delivered in community and primary care settings, but not in domiciliary settings. Expansion in the provision of these services in community and primary care can be recommended for wider implementation.

Effectiveness and cost effectiveness of pharmacist input at the ward level: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacists play important role in ensuring timely care delivery at the ward level. The optimal level of pharmacist input, however, is not clearly defined. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the evidence that assessed the outcomes of ward pharmacist input for people admitted with acute or emergent illness. METHODS: The protocol and search strategies were developed with input from clinicians. Medline, EMBASE, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, The Cochrane Library, NHS Economic Evaluations, Health Technology Assessment and Health Economic Evaluations databases were searched. Inclusion criteria specified the population as adults and young people (age >16 years) who are admitted to hospital with suspected or confirmed acute or emergent illness. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English were eligible for inclusion in the effectiveness review. Economic studies were limited to full economic evaluations and comparative cost analysis. Included studies were quality-assessed. Data were extracted, summarised. and meta-analysed, where appropriate. RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs and 7 economic studies were included. The RCTs were from USA (n = 3), Sweden (n = 2), Belgium (n = 2), China (n = 2), Australia (n = 2), Denmark (n = 2), Northern Ireland, Norway, Canada, UK and Netherlands. The economic studies were from UK (n = 2), Sweden (n = 2), Belgium and Netherlands. The results showed that regular pharmacist input was most cost effective. It reduced length-of-stay (mean = -1.74 days [95% CI: 2.76, -0.72], and increased patient and/or carer satisfaction (Relative Risk (RR) = 1.49 [1.09, 2.03] at discharge). At £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY)-gained cost-effectiveness threshold, it was either cost-saving or cost-effective (Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) = £632/QALY-gained). No evidence was found for 7-day pharmacist presence. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacist inclusion in the ward multidisciplinary team improves patient safety and satisfaction and is cost-effective when regularly provided throughout the ward stay. Research is needed to determine whether the provision of 7-day service is cost-effective.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Strategies for People Undergoing Elective Total Hip and Total Knee Replacement Surgeries in the English National Health Service.

Background: Major orthopedic surgery, such as elective total hip replacement (eTHR) and elective total knee replacement (eTKR), are associated with a higher risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) than other surgical procedures. Little is known, however, about the cost-effectiveness of VTE prophylaxis strategies in people undergoing these procedures. Aim: The aim of this work was to assess the cost-effectiveness of these strategies from the English National Health Service perspective to inform NICE guideline (NG89) recommendations. Materials and Methods: Cost-utility analysis, using decision modeling, was undertaken to compare 15 VTE prophylaxis strategies for eTHR and 12 for eTKR, in addition to "no prophylaxis" strategy. The analysis complied with the NICE Reference Case. Structure and assumptions were agreed with the guideline committee. Incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) was calculated, vs. the model comparator (LMWH+ antiembolism stockings), at a threshold of £20,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The model was run probabilistically. Deterministic sensitivity analyses (SAs) were undertaken to assess the robustness of the results. Results: The most cost-effective strategies were LMWH for 10 days followed by aspirin for 28 days (INMB = £530 [95% CI: -£784 to £1,103], probability of being most cost-effective = 72%) for eTHR, and foot pump (INMB = £353 [95% CI: -£101 to £665]; probability of being most cost-effective = 18%) for eTKR. There was considerable uncertainty regarding the cost-effectiveness ranking in the eTKR analysis. The results were robust to change in all SAs. Conclusions: For eTHR, LMWH (standard dose) for 10 days followed by aspirin for 28 days is the most cost-effective VTE prophylaxis strategy. For eTKR, the results are highly uncertain but foot pump appeared to be the most cost-effective strategy, followed closely by aspirin (low dose). Future research should focus on assessing cost-effectiveness of VTE prophylaxis in the eTKR population.

The economic burden of stroke care in England, Wales and Northern Ireland: Using a national stroke register to estimate and report patient-level health economic outcomes in stroke.

INTRODUCTION: Stroke registries are used in many settings to measure stroke treatment and outcomes, but rarely include data on health economic outcomes. We aimed to extend the Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme registry of England, Wales and Northern Ireland to derive and report patient-level estimates of the cost of stroke care. METHODS: An individual patient simulation model was built to estimate health and social care costs at one and five years after stroke, and the cost-benefits of thrombolysis and early supported discharge. Costs were stratified according to age, sex, stroke type (ischaemic or primary intracerebral haemorrhage) and stroke severity. The results were illustrated using data on all patients with stroke included in Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme from April 2015 to March 2016 (n = 84,184). RESULTS: The total cost of health and social care for patients with acute stroke each year in England, Wales and Northern Ireland was £3.60 billion in the first five years after admission (mean per patient cost: £46,039). There was fivefold variation in the magnitude of costs between patients, ranging from £19,101 to £107,336. Costs increased with older age, increasing stroke severity and intracerebral hemorrhage stroke. Increasing the proportion of eligible patients receiving thrombolysis or early supported discharge was estimated to save health and social care costs by five years after stroke. DISCUSSION: The cost of stroke care is large and varies widely between patients. Increasing the proportion of eligible patients receiving thrombolysis or early supported discharge could contribute to reducing the financial burden of stroke. CONCLUSION: Extending stroke registers to report individualised data on costs may enhance their potential to support quality improvement and research.

Basal Insulin Regimens for Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relative efficacy and safety of basal insulin regimens in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). METHODS: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials comparing two or more basal insulin regimens were conducted. The following basal insulin regimens were included: Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (iNPH) (once [od], twice [bid], and four times daily [qid]), insulin detemir (iDet) (od and bid), insulin glargine 100 IU (iGlarg) (od), and insulin degludec (iDegl) (od). We searched the following databases: MEDLINE via OVID, Embase via OVID, and the Cochrane Library (Wiley). Study quality was appraised using Cochrane risk-of-bias checklist for randomized controlled trials. Two outcomes (change in hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] and rate of severe/major hypoglycemia [SH]) were analyzed. Network inconsistency was assessed using Bucher and chi-square tests. RESULTS: Thirty studies met the eligibility criteria. Twenty-five were included in the HbA1c network and 16 in the SH network. All studies were of moderate quality. No network inconsistency was evident in the HbA1c network. Of the seven regimens of interest, iDet (bid) had the highest probability of being best (mean change in HbA1c -0.48; 95% credible interval -0.69 to -0.29). In contrast, the SH network demonstrated both considerable uncertainty and significant network inconsistency (χ2 test, P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Of the specified frequency regimens, iDet (bid) had the highest probability of being the best basal insulin regimen in terms of reduction in HbA1c. Ranking of the regimens in terms of the SH rate was highly uncertain and no clear conclusion could be made.

Basal Insulin Regimens for Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Cost-Utility Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of basal insulin regimens for adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus in England. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis was conducted in accordance with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence reference case. The UK National Health Service and personal and social services perspective was used and a 3.5% discount rate was applied for both costs and outcomes. Relative effectiveness estimates were based on a systematic review of published trials and a Bayesian network meta-analysis. The IMS CORE Diabetes Model was used, in which net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated using a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. A wide range of sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Insulin detemir (twice daily) [iDet (bid)] had the highest mean QALY gain (11.09 QALYs) and NMB (£181,456) per patient over the model time horizon. Compared with the lowest cost strategy (insulin neutral protamine Hagedorn once daily), it had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £7844/QALY gained. Insulin glargine (od) [iGlarg (od)] and iDet (od) were ranked as second and third, with NMBs of £180,893 and £180,423, respectively. iDet (bid) remained the most cost-effective treatment in all the sensitivity analyses performed except when high doses were assumed (>30% increment compared with other regimens), where iGlarg (od) ranked first. CONCLUSIONS: iDet (bid) is the most cost-effective regimen, providing the highest QALY gain and NMB. iGlarg (od) and iDet (od) are possible options for those for whom the iDet (bid) regimen is not acceptable or does not achieve required glycemic control.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Natriuretic Peptide Testing and Specialist Management in Patients with Suspected Acute Heart Failure.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost-effectiveness of natriuretic peptide (NP) testing and specialist outreach in patients with acute heart failure (AHF) residing off the cardiology ward. METHODS: We used a Markov model to estimate costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for patients presenting to hospital with suspected AHF. We examined diagnostic workup with and without the NP test in suspected new cases, and we examined the impact of specialist heart failure outreach in all suspected cases. Inputs for the model were derived from systematic reviews, the UK national heart failure audit, randomized controlled trials, expert consensus from a National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline development group, and a national online survey. The main benefit from specialist care (cardiology ward and specialist outreach) was the increased likelihood of discharge on disease-modifying drugs for people with left ventricular systolic dysfunction, which improve mortality and reduce re-admissions due to worsened heart failure (associated with lower utility). Costs included diagnostic investigations, admissions, pharmacological therapy, and follow-up heart failure care. RESULTS: NP testing and specialist outreach are both higher cost, higher QALY, cost-effective strategies (incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £11,656 and £2,883 per QALY gained, respectively). Combining NP and specialist outreach is the most cost-effective strategy. This result was robust to both univariate deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: NP testing for the diagnostic workup of new suspected AHF is cost-effective. The use of specialist heart failure outreach for inpatients with AHF residing off the cardiology ward is cost-effective. Both interventions will help improve outcomes for this high-risk group.

Diagnosis and Management of Iron Deficiency in CKD: A Summary of the NICE Guideline Recommendations and Their Rationale.

The UK-based National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has updated its guidance on iron deficiency and anemia management in chronic kidney disease. This report outlines the recommendations regarding iron deficiency and their rationale. Serum ferritin alone or transferrin saturation alone are no longer recommended as diagnostic tests to assess iron deficiency. Red blood cell markers (percentage hypochromic red blood cells, reticulocyte hemoglobin content, or reticulocyte hemoglobin equivalent) are better than ferritin level alone at predicting responsiveness to intravenous iron. When red blood cell markers are not available, a combination of transferrin saturation < 20% and ferritin level < 100ng/mL is an alternative. In comparisons of the cost-effectiveness of different iron status testing and treatment strategies, using percentage hypochromic red blood cells > 6% was the most cost-effective strategy for both hemodialysis and nonhemodialysis patients. A trial of oral iron replacement is recommended in people not receiving an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) and not on hemodialysis therapy. For children receiving ESAs, but not treated by hemodialysis, oral iron should be considered. In adults and children receiving ESAs and/or on hemodialysis therapy, intravenous iron should be offered. When giving intravenous iron, high-dose low-frequency administration is recommended. For all children and for adults receiving in-center hemodialysis, low-dose high-frequency administration may be more appropriate.

Biological therapies for the treatment of severe psoriasis in patients with previous exposure to biological therapy: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Biologic therapies have revolutionised the care of patients with psoriasis, although they come at significant extra cost. Guidance on their use in the UK National Health Service (NHS) has so far focused on patients who are "biologic naive", yet a minority of patients have poor response and require further treatment. OBJECTIVES: To assess the potential cost effectiveness of sequential biologic therapies in patients with psoriasis who have been exposed to previous biologic therapy. METHODS: A two-part model with a 10-year time horizon was built to model an initial 13.5-week "trial" phase and a longer-term "treatment" period with annual Markov cycles. Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) response rates from subgroup analyses of three randomised placebo-controlled trials evaluating biologic agents were considered. A meta-analysis of these data provided probabilities of achieving PASI response (50/75/90) in the short term, and published evidence and assumptions were used to predict outcomes over the longer term. Benefits were measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs (2013-14) to the UK NHS included drugs, administration, monitoring, and hospitalisation. Costs and benefits were discounted 3.5 % per annum. Cost effectiveness of sequential biologic therapy was measured using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) compared to best supportive care (BSC). Extensive sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the impact of alternative assumptions on the results. RESULTS: Results indicate that over 10 years, switching to a second biologic following intolerance to or failure of a first is likely to generate more QALYs than BSC, but at a higher cost. Base case results suggest the ICER of the second biologic compared to BSC is £17,681 per QALY; however, sensitivity analyses indicate that changes in the efficacy of BSC, drug costs, dropout rates, and rates of hospitalisation have a significant impact, causing the ICER to range from less than £10,000 to over £50,000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Further biologic therapy for patients with psoriasis who have previously been treated with biologic therapy may be cost effective, although there is considerable uncertainty in the results. Future studies should be designed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of biologic therapies in this subgroup with particular attention given to short-term and longer-term responses.

Trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing surgical and endoscopic drainage in patients with obstructive chronic pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE: Published evidence indicates that surgical drainage of the pancreatic duct was more effective than endoscopic drainage for patients with chronic pancreatitis. This analysis assessed the cost-effectiveness of surgical versus endoscopic drainage in obstructive chronic pancreatitis. DESIGN: This trial-based cost-utility analysis (ISRCTN04572410) was conducted from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective and during a 79-month time horizon. During the trial the details of the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, and pancreatic insufficiency were collected. The resource use was varied in the sensitivity analysis based on a review of the literature. The health outcome was the Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY), generated using EQ-5D data collected during the trial. There were no pancreas-related deaths in the trial. All-cause mortality from the trial was incorporated into the QALY estimates in the sensitivity analysis. SETTING: Hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with obstructive chronic pancreatitis. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs, QALYs and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: The result of the base-case analysis was that surgical drainage dominated endoscopic drainage, being both more effective and less costly. The sensitivity analysis varied mortality and resource use and showed that the surgical option remained dominant in all scenarios. The probability of cost-effectiveness for surgical drainage was 100% for the base case and 82% in the assessed most conservative case scenario. CONCLUSIONS: In obstructive chronic pancreatitis, surgical drainage is highly cost-effective compared with endoscopic drainage from a UK NHS perspective.

Nutritional screening for improving professional practice for patient outcomes in hospital and primary care settings.

BACKGROUND: Given the prevalence of under-nutrition and reports of inadequate nutritional management of patients in hospitals and the community, nutritional screening may play a role in reducing the risks of malnutrition. Screening programmes can invoke costs to health systems and patients. It is therefore important to assess the effectiveness of nutritional screening programmes. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of nutritional screening in improving quality of care (professional practice) and patient outcomes compared with usual care. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL up to June 2012 to find relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled studies, controlled clinical trials, controlled before-after studies and interrupted time series studies assessing the effectiveness of nutritional screening were eligible for inclusion in the review. We considered process outcomes (for example patient identification, referral to dietitian) and patient outcomes (for example mortality, change in body mass index (BMI)). Participants were adult patients aged 16 years or over. We included studies conducted in different settings, including hospitals, out-patient clinics, primary care or long term care settings. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data from the included studies. Meta-analysis was considered but was not conducted due to the discrepancies between the studies. The studies were heterogeneous in their design, setting, intervention and outcomes. We analysed the data using a narrative synthesis approach. MAIN RESULTS: After conducting initial searches and screening the titles and abstracts of the identified literature, 77 full text papers were retrieved and read. Ultimately three studies were included. Two controlled before-after studies were conducted in hospital settings (one in the UK and one in the Netherlands) and one cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted in a primary care setting (in the USA).The study conducted in primary care reported that physicians were receptive to the screening intervention, but the intervention did not result in any improvements in the malnutrition detection rate or nutritional intervention rate. The two studies conducted in hospitals had important methodological limitations. One study reported that as a result of the intervention, the recording of patients' weight increased in the intervention wards. No significant changes were observed in the referral rates to dietitians or care at meal time. The third study reported weight gains and a reduction in hospital acquired infection rate in the intervention hospital. They found no significant differences in length of stay, pressure sores, malnutrition and treatment costs per patient between the two hospitals. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence is insufficient to support the effectiveness of nutritional screening, although equally there is no evidence of no effect. Therefore, more high quality studies should be conducted to assess the effectiveness of nutritional screening in different settings.

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of anti-epileptic drugs for refractory focal epilepsy: systematic review and network meta-analysis reveals the need for long term comparator trials.

AIMS: To evaluate the comparative efficacy (50% reduction in seizure frequency) and tolerability (premature withdrawal due to adverse events) of anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) for refractory epilepsy. METHODS: We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library 2009, issue 2) including Epilepsy Group's specialized register, MEDLINE (1950 to March 2009), EMBASE (1980 to March 2009), and Current Contents Connect (1998 to March 2009) to conduct a systematic review of published studies, developed a treatment network and undertook a network meta-analysis. RESULTS: Forty-three eligible trials with 6346 patients and 12 interventions, including placebo, contributed to the analysis. Only three direct drug comparator trials were identified, the remaining 40 trials being placebo-controlled. Conventional random-effects meta-analysis indicated all drugs were superior in efficacy to placebo (overall odds ratio (OR] 3.78, 95% CI 3.14, 4.55) but did not permit firm distinction between drugs on the basis of the efficacy or tolerability. A Bayesian network meta-analysis prioritized oxcarbazepine, topiramate and pregabalin on the basis of short term efficacy. However, sodium valproate, levetiracetam, gabapentin and vigabatrin were prioritized on the basis of short-term efficacy and tolerability, with the caveat that vigabatrin is recognized as being associated with serious visual disturbance with chronic use. CONCLUSION: Of the wide range of AEDs licensed for the treatment of refractory epilepsy, sodium valproate, levetiracetam and gabapentin demonstrated the best balance of efficacy and tolerability. Until regulators mandate greater use of active comparator trials with longer term follow-up, network meta-analysis provides the only available means to quantify these clinically important parameters.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of serial measurement of circulating natriuretic peptide concentration in chronic heart failure.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of three monitoring strategies for optimising medical therapy in chronic heart failure (CHF). DESIGN: This analysis was based on six randomised controlled trials. Costs were measured from a UK NHS perspective and estimated for patients' lifetime. The health outcome was the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). SETTING: Hospital and community. PATIENTS: Patients with CHF. INTERVENTIONS: Serial measurement of natriuretic peptide (NP) by a specialist, clinical assessment by a specialist, and usual care in the community. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs, QALYs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: Serial NP measurement by a specialist was the most cost-effective option in patients with CHF due to left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD), showing an ICER of £3304 compared with clinical assessment. Serial NP measurement by a specialist was strongly favoured in patients with CHF from any cause, for all patients (ICER of £14 694 compared with clinical assessment by a specialist) and for the age subgroup ≤75 years (ICER of £2517 compared with usual care). However, serial NP measurement by a specialist was dominated (less effective and more costly) by alternative strategies in the subgroup age >75 years with CHF from any cause. Clinical assessment by a specialist of patients >75 years of age with CHF from any cause was cost-effective compared with usual care (ICER of £11 508). CONCLUSIONS: Serial measurement of NP concentration by a specialist is the most cost-effective strategy for CHF due to LVSD and from any cause, except in the subgroup of patients >75 years with CHF from any cause, where treatment guided by NP measurement may be harmful and not cost-effective.

The cost effectiveness of Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques for the diagnosis of tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: There is wide variation in the techniques deployed to diagnose tuberculosis in the UK, with little agreement on which tools or strategies are cost effective. This analysis therefore comprehensively evaluated the cost effectiveness of currently available diagnostic strategies for routine diagnosis of TB in the NHS. METHODS: The analysis compared strategies consisting of Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques, culture and microscopy. A decision tree was used to estimate costs and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) from a UK health service perspective. The sensitivity and specificity of each test determined the true and false positive and negative results in patients suspected of having active tuberculosis. These results led to either early, correct diagnosis or delayed diagnosis and the associated costs and QALYs. The presence of active tuberculosis combined with the side effects of treatment was associated with reduction in quality of life. Costs included were test costs, drug costs and the management of tuberculosis. Drug costs were based on generic UK list prices. Uncertainty in the model was explored through probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: The cost effective strategy at threshold of £20,000 per QALY was a strategy using only sputum microscopy and culture routinely, meaning Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques are not cost effective at baseline. When the prevalence of tuberculosis was increased, however, nucleic acid amplification became cost effective at the same threshold. Aside from the prevalence, the results were shown to be robust. At low tuberculosis prevalence, Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques may not be cost effective but their potential in higher prevalence situations is considerable.

Cost-effectiveness of options for the diagnosis of high blood pressure in primary care: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of hypertension has traditionally been based on blood-pressure measurements in the clinic, but home and ambulatory measurements better correlate with cardiovascular outcome, and ambulatory monitoring is more accurate than both clinic and home monitoring in diagnosing hypertension. We aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of different diagnostic strategies for hypertension. METHODS: We did a Markov model-based probabilistic cost-effectiveness analysis. We used a hypothetical primary-care population aged 40 years or older with a screening blood-pressure measurement greater than 140/90 mm Hg and risk-factor prevalence equivalent to the general population. We compared three diagnostic strategies-further blood pressure measurement in the clinic, at home, and with an ambulatory monitor-in terms of lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life years, and cost-effectiveness. FINDINGS: Ambulatory monitoring was the most cost-effective strategy for the diagnosis of hypertension for men and women of all ages. It was cost-saving for all groups (from -£56 [95% CI -105 to -10] in men aged 75 years to -£323 [-389 to -222] in women aged 40 years) and resulted in more quality-adjusted life years for men and women older than 50 years (from 0·006 [0·000 to 0·015] for women aged 60 years to 0·022 [0·012 to 0·035] for men aged 70 years). This finding was robust when assessed with a wide range of deterministic sensitivity analyses around the base case, but was sensitive if home monitoring was judged to have equal test performance to ambulatory monitoring or if treatment was judged effective irrespective of whether an individual was hypertensive. INTERPRETATION: Ambulatory monitoring as a diagnostic strategy for hypertension after an initial raised reading in the clinic would reduce misdiagnosis and save costs. Additional costs from ambulatory monitoring are counterbalanced by cost savings from better targeted treatment. Ambulatory monitoring is recommended for most patients before the start of antihypertensive drugs. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research and the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic vs surgical drainage of the pancreatic duct in patients with chronic pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: A randomized trial that compared endoscopic and surgical drainage of the pancreatic duct in patients with advanced chronic pancreatitis reported a significant benefit of surgery after a 2-year follow-up period. We evaluated the long-term outcome of these patients after 5 years. METHODS: Between 2000 and 2004, 39 symptomatic patients were randomly assigned to groups that underwent endoscopic drainage or operative pancreaticojejunostomy. In 2009, information was collected regarding pain, quality of life, morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay, number of procedures undergone, changes in pancreatic function, and costs. Analysis was performed according to an intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: During the 79-month follow-up period, one patient was lost and 7 died from unrelated causes. Of the patients treated by endoscopy, 68% required additional drainage compared with 5% in the surgery group (P = .001). Hospital stay and costs were comparable, but overall, patients assigned to endoscopy underwent more procedures (median, 12 vs 4; P = .001). Moreover, 47% of the patients in the endoscopy group eventually underwent surgery. Although the mean difference in Izbicki pain scores was no longer significant (39 vs 22; P = .12), surgery was still superior in terms of pain relief (80% vs 38%; P = .042). Levels of quality of life and pancreatic function were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: In the long term, symptomatic patients with advanced chronic pancreatitis who underwent surgery as the initial treatment for pancreatic duct obstruction had more relief from pain, with fewer procedures, than patients who were treated endoscopically. Importantly, almost half of the patients who were treated with endoscopy eventually underwent surgery.