[Comparative economic evaluation of renal replacement therapies in Argentina, Costa Rica, and UruguayAvaliação econômica comparativa de terapias de substituição renal na Argentina, na Costa Rica e no Uruguai]. / Evaluación económica comparativa sobre terapias de reemplazo renal en Argentina, Costa Rica y Uruguay.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate differences in the cost and prevalence of renal replacement therapies (RRTs) such as transplants, peritoneal dialysis, and hemodialysis in Argentina, Costa Rica, and Uruguay, based on cost-effective dissemination strategies. METHODS: Costs and prevalence obtained from the main financers and providers in each country; analysis of cost-effectiveness using a Markov model with a five-year horizon, evaluating resource allocation strategies for their incremental cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as quality-adjusted years of life. RESULTS: There is observed dispersion among countries in terms of access to and beneficial value of RRTs, affecting their prevalence and monetary breakeven point. From the cost standpoint, it is more efficient to promote transplants and peritoneal dialysis, and to discourage hemodialysis, although the availability of each RRT in each country required a specific evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Promoting transplants saves costs, but the variable breakeven points make it necessary to determine different cost-effectiveness thresholds for each country. In Argentina and Uruguay, RRTs would be more cost-effective with an increase in the number of patients in peritoneal dialysis and higher donation rates for transplants. In Costa Rica (where there is a high transplant rate and large budgetary margin), the use of dialysis is aligned with demand and with the incidence of patients with terminal chronic kidney disease.

OBJETIVO: Avaliar as diferenças de custos e prevalência das terapias de substituição renal (TSR) como o transplante, a diálise peritoneal e a hemodiálise na Argentina, na Costa Rica e no Uruguai, mediante estratégias de difusão custo-efetivas. MÉTODOS: Foram avaliados custos e prevalência dos principais financiadores e prestadores por país, e realizada análise de custo-efetividade mediante modelo de Markov para 5 anos, avaliando estratégias de alocação de recursos expressas pela razão de custo-efetividade incremental por ano de vida ajustado por qualidade. RESULTADOS: Foi observada, entre os países, dispersão no acesso e nos valores prestacionais de TSR, afetando sua prevalência e o ponto de equilíbrio monetário. Do ponto de vista dos custos, é mais eficiente promover a realização de transplantes e de diálise peritoneal e desestimular a indicação de hemodiálise, embora a disponibilidade de cada TSR por país tenha exigido avaliações específicas. CONCLUSÕES: Promover a realização de transplantes economiza custos, embora os pontos de equilíbrio variáveis requeiram a determinação de diferentes limiares de custo-efetividade por país. Na Argentina e no Uruguai, a administração de TSR melhoraria sua eficiência se a quantidade de pacientes em diálise peritoneal e as taxas de doação para transplantes aumentassem. Na Costa Rica (onde há taxas elevadas de transplantes e margem orçamentária), a incorporação de técnicas dialíticas é ajustada por demanda e incidência de pacientes com DRCT.

Evaluación económica comparativa sobre terapias de reemplazo renal en Argentina, Costa Rica y Uruguay

[RESUMEN]. Objetivo. Evaluar las diferencias de costos y prevalencia de las terapias de remplazo renal (TRR) como el trasplante, la diálisis peritoneal y la hemodiálisis en Argentina, Costa Rica y Uruguay, mediante estrategias costo-efectivas de difusión. Métodos. Costos y prevalencia de principales financiadores y prestadores por país, y análisis de costo- efectividad mediante modelo de Markov a 5 años, evaluando estrategias de asignación de recursos expresa-das por razón incremental de costo-efectividad en costo por año de vida ajustado por calidad. Resultados. Se observa dispersión entre los países en el acceso y los valores prestacionales de TRR, que afectan su prevalencia y el punto de equilibrio monetario. Desde el punto de vista de los costos, es más eficiente promover la realización de trasplantes y de diálisis peritoneal, y desalentar la indicación de hemodiálisis, aunque la disponibilidad de cada TRR por país requirió evaluaciones particulares. Conclusiones. Promover la realización de trasplantes ahorra costos, aunque los puntos de equilibrio variables requieren determinar diferentes umbrales de costo-efectividad por país. En Argentina y Uruguay, la administración de TRR mejoraría su eficiencia si se aumentan la cantidad de pacientes en diálisis peritoneal y las tasas de donación para trasplantes. En Costa Rica (donde hay tasas elevadas de trasplantes y margen presupuestario), la incorporación de técnicas dialíticas se ajusta por demanda e incidencia de pacientes con ERCT.

[ABSTRACT]. Objective. Evaluate differences in the cost and prevalence of renal replacement therapies (RRTs) such as transplants, peritoneal dialysis, and hemodialysis in Argentina, Costa Rica, and Uruguay, based on cost-effective dissemination strategies. Methods. Costs and prevalence obtained from the main financers and providers in each country; analysis of cost-effectiveness using a Markov model with a five-year horizon, evaluating resource allocation strategies for their incremental cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as quality-adjusted years of life. Results. There is observed dispersion among countries in terms of access to and beneficial value of RRTs, affecting their prevalence and monetary breakeven point. From the cost standpoint, it is more efficient to promote transplants and peritoneal dialysis, and to discourage hemodialysis, although the availability of each RRT in each country required a specific evaluation. Conclusions. Promoting transplants saves costs, but the variable breakeven points make it necessary to determine different cost-effectiveness thresholds for each country. In Argentina and Uruguay, RRTs would be more cost-effective with an increase in the number of patients in peritoneal dialysis and higher donation rates for transplants. In Costa Rica (where there is a high transplant rate and large budgetary margin), the use of dialysis is aligned with demand and with the incidence of patients with terminal chronic kidney disease.

[RESUMO]. Objetivo. Avaliar as diferenças de custos e prevalência das terapias de substituição renal (TSR) como o transplante, a diálise peritoneal e a hemodiálise na Argentina, na Costa Rica e no Uruguai, mediante estratégias de difusão custo-efetivas. Métodos. Foram avaliados custos e prevalência dos principais financiadores e prestadores por país, e realizada análise de custo-efetividade mediante modelo de Markov para 5 anos, avaliando estratégias de alocação de recursos expressas pela razão de custo-efetividade incremental por ano de vida ajustado por qualidade. Resultados. Foi observada, entre os países, dispersão no acesso e nos valores prestacionais de TSR, afetando sua prevalência e o ponto de equilíbrio monetário. Do ponto de vista dos custos, é mais eficiente promover a realização de transplantes e de diálise peritoneal e desestimular a indicação de hemodiálise, embora a disponibilidade de cada TSR por país tenha exigido avaliações específicas. Conclusões. Promover a realização de transplantes economiza custos, embora os pontos de equilíbrio variáveis requeiram a determinação de diferentes limiares de custo-efetividade por país. Na Argentina e no Uruguai, a administração de TSR melhoraria sua eficiência se a quantidade de pacientes em diálise peritoneal e as taxas de doação para transplantes aumentassem. Na Costa Rica (onde há taxas elevadas de transplantes e margem orçamentária), a incorporação de técnicas dialíticas é ajustada por demanda e incidência de pacientes com DRCT.

An EQ-5D-5L value set based on Uruguayan population preferences.

PURPOSE: To derive a value set from Uruguayan general population using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire and report population norms. METHODS: General population individuals were randomly assigned to value 10 health states using composite time trade off and 7 pairs of health states through discrete choice experiments. A stratified sampling with quotas by location, gender, age and socio-economic status was used to respect the Uruguayan population structure. Trained interviewers conducted face-to-face interviews. The EuroQol valuation technology was used to administer the protocol as well as to collect the data. OLS and maximum likelihood robust regression models with or without interactions were tested. RESULTS: We included 794 respondents between 20 and 83 years. Their characteristics were broadly similar to the Uruguayan population. The main effects robust model was chosen to derive social values. Values ranged from -0.264 to 1. States with a misery index = 6 had a mean predicted value of 0.965. When comparing the Uruguayan population with the Argentinian EQ-5D-5L crosswalk value set, the prediction for states which differed from full health only in having one of the dimensions at level 2 were about 0.05 higher in Uruguay. The mean index value, using the selected Uruguayan EQ-5D-5L value set, for the general population in Uruguay was 0.895. In general, older people had worse values and males had slightly better values than females. CONCLUSION: We derived the EQ-5D-5L Uruguayan value set, the first in Latin America. These results will help inform decision-making using economic evaluations for resource allocation decisions.

Systemic antibiotics for treating diabetic foot infections.

BACKGROUND: Foot infection is the most common cause of non-traumatic amputation in people with diabetes. Most diabetic foot infections (DFIs) require systemic antibiotic therapy and the initial choice is usually empirical. Although there are many antibiotics available, uncertainty exists about which is the best for treating DFIs. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects and safety of systemic antibiotics in the treatment of DFIs compared with other systemic antibiotics, topical foot care or placebo. SEARCH METHODS: In April 2015 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE, and EBSCO CINAHL. We also searched in the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE; The Cochrane Library), the Health Technology Assessment database (HTA; The Cochrane Library), the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED; The Cochrane Library), unpublished literature in OpenSIGLE and ProQuest Dissertations and on-going trials registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of systemic antibiotics (oral or parenteral) in people with a DFI. Primary outcomes were clinical resolution of the infection, time to its resolution, complications and adverse effects. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data. Risk ratios (RR) were estimated for dichotomous data and, when sufficient numbers of comparable trials were available, trials were pooled in a meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: We included 20 trials with 3791 participants. Studies were heterogenous in study design, population, antibiotic regimens, and outcomes. We grouped the sixteen different antibiotic agents studied into six categories: 1) anti-pseudomonal penicillins (three trials); 2) broad-spectrum penicillins (one trial); 3) cephalosporins (two trials); 4) carbapenems (four trials); 5) fluoroquinolones (six trials); 6) other antibiotics (four trials).Only 9 of the 20 trials protected against detection bias with blinded outcome assessment. Only one-third of the trials provided enough information to enable a judgement about whether the randomisation sequence was adequately concealed. Eighteen out of 20 trials received funding from pharmaceutical industry-sponsors.The included studies reported the following findings for clinical resolution of infection: there is evidence from one large trial at low risk of bias that patients receiving ertapenem with or without vancomycin are more likely to have resolution of their foot infection than those receiving tigecycline (RR 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 0.99; 955 participants). It is unclear if there is a difference in rates of clinical resolution of infection between: 1) two alternative anti-pseudomonal penicillins (one trial); 2) an anti-pseudomonal penicillin and a broad-spectrum penicillin (one trial) or a carbapenem (one trial); 3) a broad-spectrum penicillin and a second-generation cephalosporin (one trial); 4) cephalosporins and other beta-lactam antibiotics (two trials); 5) carbapenems and anti-pseudomonal penicillins or broad-spectrum penicillins (four trials); 6) fluoroquinolones and anti-pseudomonal penicillins (four trials) or broad-spectrum penicillins (two trials); 7) daptomycin and vancomycin (one trial); 8) linezolid and a combination of aminopenicillins and beta-lactamase inhibitors (one trial); and 9) clindamycin and cephalexin (one trial).Carbapenems combined with anti-pseudomonal agents produced fewer adverse effects than anti-pseudomonal penicillins (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.84; 1 trial). An additional trial did not find significant differences in the rate of adverse events between a carbapenem alone and an anti-pseudomonal penicillin, but the rate of diarrhoea was lower for participants treated with a carbapenem (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.93; 1 trial). Daptomycin produced fewer adverse effects than vancomycin or other semi-synthetic penicillins (RR 0.61, 95%CI 0.39 to 0.94; 1 trial). Linezolid produced more adverse effects than ampicillin-sulbactam (RR 2.66; 95% CI 1.49 to 4.73; 1 trial), as did tigecycline compared to ertapenem with or without vancomycin (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.34 to 1.60; 1 trial). There was no evidence of a difference in safety for the other comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for the relative effects of different systemic antibiotics for the treatment of foot infections in diabetes is very heterogeneous and generally at unclear or high risk of bias. Consequently it is not clear if any one systemic antibiotic treatment is better than others in resolving infection or in terms of safety. One non-inferiority trial suggested that ertapenem with or without vancomycin is more effective in achieving clinical resolution of infection than tigecycline. Otherwise the relative effects of different antibiotics are unclear. The quality of the evidence is low due to limitations in the design of the included trials and important differences between them in terms of the diversity of antibiotics assessed, duration of treatments, and time points at which outcomes were assessed. Any further studies in this area should have a blinded assessment of outcomes, use standardised criteria to classify severity of infection, define clear outcome measures, and establish the duration of treatment.

Identification of biomedical journals in Spain and Latin America.

OBJECTIVES: Journals in languages other than English that publish original clinical research are often not well covered in the main biomedical databases and therefore often not included in systematic reviews. This study aimed to identify Spanish language biomedical journals from Spain and Latin America and to describe their main features. METHODS: Journals were identified in electronic databases, publishers' catalogues and local registries. Eligibility was determined by assessing data from these sources or the journals' websites, when available. FINDINGS: A total of 2457 journals were initially identified; 1498 met inclusion criteria. Spain (27.3%), Mexico (16.0%), Argentina (15.1%) and Chile (11.9%) had the highest number of journals. Most (85.8%) are currently active; 87.8% have an ISSN. The median and mean length of publication were 22 and 29 years, respectively. A total of 66.0% were indexed in at least one database; 3.0% had an impact factor in 2012. A total of 845 journals had websites (56.4%), of which 700 (82.8%) were searchable and 681 (80.6%) free of charge. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the identified journals have no impact factor or are not indexed in any of the major databases. The list of identified biomedical journals can be a useful resource when conducting hand searching activities and identifying clinical trials that otherwise would not be retrieved.

Modalidades de pago de la atención médica / Payment methods for medical care

El estudio de las modalidades de pago de la atención médica ocupa un lugar en cualquier proceso de reforma del sector salud. La modalidad de pago adoptada en un determinado sistema está en íntima relación con las principales características organizacionales del mismo y con los objetivos que persigue. Las relaciones existentes entre los diferentes actores, el usuario - beneficiario, el financiador y el proveedor se encuentran determinadas por la diferencia o la concordancia de los objetivos que persiguen y ello se refleja en la modalidad de pago predominante. El modelo adoptado es tanto un efecto de la organización del sistema sanitario en el que se desarrolla, como también un elemento determinante de algunas características predominantes del mismo. El diseño de modalidades de pago eficientes y que beneficien a todos los actores del sistema radica en la distribución equilibrada de los riesgos financieros considerando las ventajas y desventajas de cada modalidad.

Summary The ways that medical fee-paying take place, play an important role in any reform process of the health sector and are closely related to the main characteristics of the organization and its objectives. Relations between users, financiers, providers are determined by the existing differences or agreements with the objectives they aim at, they are reflected in a predominant way of stating medical-fees. The model chosen is both an effect of the health sector organization and a determinant factor of some of its predominant characteristics. The design of medical fee-paying models that include cost-effectiveness relations depends on a balanced distribution of financial risks considering advantages and disadvantages for each way.

Résumé L'analyse des moyens de paiement de l'assistance médicale a une place considérable dans toute réforme du domaine de la santé. Les modalités de paiement adopté dans un système déterminé est en étroite relation avec les caractéristiques organisationnelles de celui-ci et avec les buts visés. Les relations qui existent parmi les différents protagonistes sont déterminées par la différence ou la concordance des objectifs visés et cela se fait évident dans la modalité de paiement établie. Le modèle adopté est soit un effet de l'organisation du système sanitaire où il agit, soit un élément déterminant de certaines de ses caractéristiques essentielles. Le modèle des formes de paiement efficaces et qui sont convenables pour tous les acteurs du système, se base sur la distribution équilibrée des risques économiques tout en considérant les avantages et les désavantages de chaque modalité.