Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMC Prim Care ; 24(1): 42, 2023 02 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36750797

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In the diagnostic work-up of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), the use of point-of-care-test (POCT) D-dimer assays is emerging as a promising patient-friendly alternative to regular D-dimer assays, but their cost-effectiveness is unknown. We compared the cost-effectiveness of two POCT-based approaches to the most common, laboratory-based, situation. METHODS: A patient-level simulation model was developed to simulate the diagnostic trajectory of patients presenting with symptoms of DVT at the general practitioner (GP). Three strategies were defined for further diagnostic work-up: one based on current guidelines ('regular strategy') and two alternative approaches where a POCT for D-dimer is implemented at the 1) phlebotomy service ('DVT care pathway') and 2) GP practice ('fast-POCT strategy'). Probabilities, costs and health outcomes were obtained from the literature. Costs and effects were determined from a societal perspective over a time horizon of 6 months. Uncertainty in model outcomes was assessed with a one-way sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: The Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) scores for the three DVT diagnostic work-up strategies were all around 0.43 across a 6 month-time horizon. Cost-savings of the two POCT-based strategies compared to the regular strategy were €103/patient for the DVT care pathway (95% CI: -€117-89), and €87/patient for the fast-POCT strategy (95% CI: -€113-67). CONCLUSIONS: Point-of-care-based approaches result in similar health outcomes compared with regular strategy. Given their expected cost-savings and patient-friendly nature, we recommend implementing a D-dimer POCT device in the diagnostic DVT work-up.


Assuntos
Análise de Custo-Efetividade , Trombose Venosa , Humanos , Trombose Venosa/diagnóstico , Análise Custo-Benefício , Medicina de Família e Comunidade , Testes Imediatos
2.
Trials ; 21(1): 842, 2020 Oct 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33036661

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Articular cartilage defects in the knee have poor intrinsic healing capacity and may lead to functional disability and osteoarthritis (OA). "Instant MSC Product accompanying Autologous Chondron Transplantation" (IMPACT) combines rapidly isolated recycled autologous chondrons with allogeneic MSCs in a one-stage surgery. IMPACT was successfully executed in a first-in-man investigator-driven phase I/II clinical trial in 35 patients. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy of IMPACT to nonsurgical treatment for the treatment of large (2-8 cm2) articular cartilage defects in the knee. METHODS: Sixty patients will be randomized to receive nonsurgical care or IMPACT. After 9 months of nonsurgical care, patients in the control group are allowed to receive IMPACT surgery. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), pain (numeric rating scale, NRS), and EuroQol five dimensions five levels (EQ5D-5 L) will be used to compare outcomes at baseline and 3, 6, 9, 12, and 18 months after inclusion. Cartilage formation will be assessed at baseline, and 6 and 18 months after inclusion using MRI. An independent rheumatologist will monitor the onset of a potential inflammatory response. (Severe) adverse events will be recorded. Lastly, the difference between IMPACT and nonsurgical care in terms of societal costs will be assessed by monitoring healthcare resource use and productivity losses during the study period. A health economic model will be developed to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of IMPACT vs. nonsurgical treatment in terms of costs per quality adjusted life year over a 5-year time horizon. DISCUSSION: This study is designed to evaluate the efficacy of IMPACT compared to nonsurgical care. Additionally, safety of IMPACT will be assessed in 30 to 60 patients. Lastly, this study will evaluate the cost-effectiveness of IMPACT compared to nonsurgical care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NL67161.000.18 [Registry ID: CCMO] 2018#003470#27 [EU-CTR; registered on 26 March 2019] NCT04236739 [ ClinicalTrials.gov ] [registered after start of inclusion; 22 January 2020].


Assuntos
Cartilagem Articular , Transplante de Células-Tronco Hematopoéticas , Transplante de Células-Tronco Mesenquimais , Células-Tronco Mesenquimais , Osteoartrite do Joelho , Cartilagem Articular/diagnóstico por imagem , Cartilagem Articular/cirurgia , Condrócitos , Humanos , Articulação do Joelho/diagnóstico por imagem , Articulação do Joelho/cirurgia , Transplante de Células-Tronco Mesenquimais/efeitos adversos , Osteoartrite do Joelho/diagnóstico por imagem , Osteoartrite do Joelho/cirurgia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Transplante Autólogo , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...