Comparative analyses of holder pasteurization vs. HTST pasteurization for donor milk: a cost-minimization study applicable to human milk banks.

BACKGROUND: High-temperature short-time (HTST) pasteurization (72-75 °C, 15 s) is an alternative treatment to traditional Holder pasteurization (HoP) (62ºC, 30 min) for donor milk. HTST pasteurization guarantees the milk's microbiological safety and retains more of its biologically and nutritionally active compounds, but the cost of implementing this technology for a human milk bank is unknown. METHODS: A cost-minimization study was carried out on the facilities of a regional human milk bank in a public hospital. Total production costs (fixed plus variables) were quantified using HTST pasteurization and HoP in three hypothetical scenarios: (1) costs of the first 10 L of pasteurized milk in a newly opened milk bank; (2) costs of the first 10 L of pasteurized milk in an active milk bank; and (3) costs using the maximum production capacity of both technologies in the first two years of operation. The following costs were analyzed: health care professionals, equipment and software, external services, and consumables. RESULTS: In scenario 1, the total production costs were € 228,097.00 for the HTST method versus € 154,064.00 for the HoP method. In scenario 2, these costs were similar (€ 6,594.00 for HTST pasteurization versus € 5,912.00 for HoP). The cost of healthcare professionals was reduced by more than half when pasteurization was carried out by the HTST method versus the Holder method (€ 84.00 and € 191.00, respectively). In scenario 3, the unit cost of milk pasteurized by the HTST method decreased from the first to the second year by 43.5%, while for the HoP method, it decreased by 30%. CONCLUSIONS: HTST pasteurization requires a high initial investment in equipment; however, it provides a significant minimization of production costs in the long term, pasteurizes large quantities of donor milk per working day and achieves a more efficient management of the time of the health care professionals in charge of the bank's operation compared to HoP.

Analysis of the Prescription of Antibiotics During the Implementation of COVID-19 Personal Protection Measures in a Regional Health System.

INTRODUCTION: The rational consumption of antibiotics is a valuable goal for developed countries. Antibiotic resistance (AMR) was the main health threat before the coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. To restrict COVID-19 transmission, the Spanish government implemented personal protection measures, including the decree of a lockdown. The objective of this study is to analyze the prescription of antibiotics during the implementation of COVID-19 personal protection measures in primary care in a Spanish region. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Primary monthly official dispensations of antibacterials for systemic use (J01) were analyzed, disaggregating by clinical (active principle, age and sex of the patient) and socio-economic variables (basic health zone and level of income). Defined daily doses per thousand inhabitants (DID) prescribed in 2020 were compared with the prescription in 2019 using Chi-square test. RESULTS: In 2020, the prescription of antibiotics (11.37 DID) was significantly lower (-23.73%) than in 2019 (14.91 DID). The main reduction in the amount prescribed was found in May (-42.64%). However, the prescription was significantly higher (71.34%) in February 2020 than in the same month in 2019 in nursing homes. In March 2020, prescriptions were lower (-13.71%) than in the same month in 2019, except for the middle-income group, in which prescriptions were higher (9.67%), as well as azithromycin (10.11%). In April and May 2020, prescriptions were significantly lower than in 2019 in all age groups and both in women and men. CONCLUSION: Personal protection measures against COVID-19 transmission (lockdown, mask, social distance and increased hygiene) coincide in time with the greatest reduction in antibiotic prescription.

Health-Economic Analyses of Diagnostics: Guidance on Design and Reporting.

Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) can be used to assess the value of diagnostics in clinical practice. Due to the introduction of the European in vitro diagnostic and medical devices regulations, more clinical data on new diagnostics may become available, which may improve the interest and feasibility of performing CEAs. We present eight recommendations on the reporting and design of CEAs of diagnostics. The symptoms patients experience, the clinical setting, locations of test sampling and analysis, and diagnostic algorithms should be clearly reported. The used time horizon should reflect the time horizon used to model the treatment after the diagnostic pathway. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) or disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) should be used as the clinical outcomes but may be combined with other relevant outcomes, such as real options value. If the number of tests using the same equipment can vary, the economy of scale should be considered. An understandable graphical representation of the various diagnostic algorithms should be provided to understand the results, such as an efficiency frontier. Finally, the budget impact and affordability should be considered. These recommendations can be used in addition to other, more general, recommendations, such as the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) or the reference case for economic evaluation by the international decision support initiative.

Efficiency of Diagnostic Testing for Helicobacter pylori Infections-A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The most recommended treatment for a Helicobacter pylori infection is high doses of combined antibiotics. The objective of this article is to perform a systematic review of the economic evaluation studies applied to assess the efficiency of diagnostic testing for H. pylori infections, so that their main characteristics can be identified and to learn from the literature how the antimicrobial resistance (AMR) issue is incorporated into these economic evaluations. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to compare the costs and clinical effectiveness of diagnostic strategies for H. pylori infections. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and extracted the items from the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. RESULTS: We found thirteen articles that were of good quality according to CHEERS: six studies focused on diagnostics of Helicobacter pylori infections associated with dyspepsia and four on duodenal ulcers. Testing was found to be the most cost-effective strategy in eight articles. Four studies considered AMR. CONCLUSIONS: Testing was more cost-effective than empirical treatment, except in cases of high prevalence (as with developing countries) or when patients could be stratified according to their comorbidities. The introduction of AMR into the model may change the efficiency of the testing strategy.

Diagnostic Testing for Sepsis: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations.

INTRODUCTION: Sepsis is a serious and expensive healthcare problem, when caused by a multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria mortality and costs increase. A reduction in the time until the start of treatment improves clinical results. The objective is to perform a systematic review of economic evaluations to analyze the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic methods in sepsis and to draw lessons on the methods used to incorporate antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in these studies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed, and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting standards (CHEERS) checklist was used to extract the information from the texts. RESULTS: A total of 16 articles were found. A decision model was performed in 14. We found two ways to handle resistance while modelling: the test could identify infections caused by a resistant pathogen or resistance-related inputs, or outcomes were included (the incidence of AMR in sepsis patients, antibiotic use, and infection caused by resistant bacterial pathogens). CONCLUSION: Using a diagnostic technique to detect sepsis early on is more cost-effective than standard care. Setting a direct relationship between the implementation of a testing strategy and the reduction of AMR cases, we made several assumptions about the efficacy of antibiotics and the length-of-stay of patients.

Effects of economic and health policies on the consumption of antibiotics in a Spanish region.

OBJECTIVES: Inappropriate and indiscriminate use of antibiotics is one of the main factors contributing to the increasing bacterial resistance. Surveillance of antibiotic consumption is fundamental for assessing the effects of rational use-oriented measures introduced under economic or health policies. This study quantifies and assesses the introduction of a pharmaceutical co-payment and implementation of campaigns to increase awareness about and rational use in the consumption of antibiotics (volume and expenditure). METHODS: Monthly official dispensations recorded by a health authority (La Rioja, Spain) between January 2009 and December 2017 (108 observations). Total and disaggregated (by active principle and patient's income level) time series for a number of packages and expenditure were studied using intervention and counterfactual analyses (Box-Jenkins methodology). RESULTS: Co-payment reduced the total antibiotic consumption (number of packages -8.52% and expenditure -8.61%) and the difference was greater for the highest-priced antibiotics. Only two of the four campaigns had a significant effect, which lasted 6 months. Counterfactual analysis estimated the savings. CONCLUSION: Economic and health policies helped to reduce antibiotic consumption. Each policy has different effects, co-payment reduces overall drug consumption through a price effect (loss of purchasing power), awareness campaigns depend on other elements for their success (media, scope and patient income).

[Risk sharing contracts in the national health care system: Perceptions of health care professionals]. / Los contratos de riesgo compartido en el sistema nacional de salud: Percepciones de los profesionales sanitarios.

OBJECTIVE: Risk-sharing contracts (RSC) present a novel management tool, which link the payment to the pharmaceutical company to health outcomes. The objective of this work was to know the perception of health professionals about the utility of these agreements in the Spanish National Health System. METHODS: A questionnaire was designed to conduct a series of semi-structured interviews with hospital pharmacy, laboratory and oncology professionals from Spanish hospitals in Madrid, Aragón, Castilla-La Mancha, Castilla y León, Cataluña, La Rioja, País Vasco and Navarra. The selection criteria was for convenience. The interview period was from April to November 2017. A qualitative analysis was performed based on the responses from 14 interviews. RESULTS: All the surveyed affirmed that the CRCs allow to improve the economic and administrative management of the hospital, emphasizing as main advantages the budgetary control, the obtaining of funding and the savings possibilities. CRCs are perceived (13 of 14 respondents) as agreements with positive health implications because they increased the portfolio of treatments and had greater efficacy. The need for CRCs to register patients, involved monitoring and control, also contributed to the improvement of their health. In addition, CRCs were believed (8 out of 14 respondents) to facilitate the introduction of personalized medicine (MP) as both depend on diagnostic tests, one for screening reasons (MP) and the other for obtain clinical evidences that improve economic outcomes (CRC). However, it was considered that signing the CRCs entails the need to modify certain regulations (5 out of 14 respondents) as well as to increase the number of staff to handle bureaucratic tasks and to increase laboratory tests, which can complicate health management. CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative social research techniques have proven to be useful for gathering information on a new topic and understanding the perception of the advantages and disadvantages of CRCs, as well as their association with the MP. In addition, synergies were detected between the CRCs and the MP. Respondents had positive opinions on CRCs about its application, although work must be done in order to improve the normative and organizational context so that the additional complexity that they incorporate does not constitute an obstacle to extend its use.

OBJETIVO: Los contratos de riesgo compartido (CRC) presentan un novedoso instrumento de gestión sanitaria que condiciona el pago a la compañía farmacéutica dependiendi de si el paciente tratado con su fármaco es curado con éxito. El objetivo de este trabajo fue conocer la percepción de los profesionales sanitarios acerca de la utilidad de dichos acuerdos en el Sistema Nacional de Salud español. METODOS: Se diseñó un cuestionario para realizar una serie de entrevistas semiestructuradas con profesionales de farmacia hospitalaria, laboratorio y oncología de hospitales españoles de Madrid, Aragón, Castilla-La Mancha, Castilla y León, Cataluña, La Rioja, País Vasco y Navarra. El criterio de selección fue de conveniencia. El periodo de realización de las entrevistas fue de abril a noviembre de 2017. Se efectuó un análisis cualitativo a partir de las respuestas de 14 entrevistas. RESULTADOS: Todos los encuestados afirmaron que los CRC permiten mejorar la gestión económica y administrativa del hospital, destacando el control presupuestario, la obtención de financiación y la posibilidad de ahorro como ventajas principales. Los CRC son percibidos (13 de 14 entrevistados) como acuerdos con implicaciones positivas para la salud porque aumentaban el portfolio de tratamientos disponibles y porque los tratamientos introducidos contaban con una mayor eficacia. La necesidad de los CRC de registrar a los pacientes implicaba un seguimiento y control que también se entendió contribuía a la mejora de su salud. Además, los CRC se creyó (8 de 14 entrevistados) que favorecían la introducción de la medicina personalizada (MP) ya que tanto la MP como los CRC dependen e impulsan la elaboración de pruebas diagnósticas, ya sea por motivos de cribado (MP) o de aumentar las evidencias clínicas para mejorar los resultados económicos (CRC). No obstante, se consideró que la firma de los CRC conlleva la necesidad de modificar ciertas normativas (5 de 14 entrevistados), de aumentar las plantillas para encargarse de tareas burocráticas, como la elaboración de registros, y también de incrementar las pruebas de laboratorio, lo cual puede complicar la gestión sanitaria. CONCLUSIONES: En general, los CRC contaron con opiniones positivas acerca de su aplicación aunque deba trabajarse para mejorar el contexto normativo y organizativo de modo que la complejidad adicional que incorporan no constituya una traba para extender su uso. Además, se detectaron sinergias entre los CRC y la MP.

Los contratos de riesgo compartido en el sistema nacional de salud: percepciones de los profesionales sanitarios / Risk sharing contracts in the national health care system: perceptions of health care professionals

Fundamentos: Los contratos de riesgo compartido (CRC) presentan un novedoso instrumento de gestión sanitaria que condiciona el pago a la compañía farmacéutica dependiendo de si el paciente tratado con su fármaco es curado con éxito. El objetivo de este trabajo fue conocer la percepción de los profesionales sanitarios acerca de la utilidad de dichos acuerdos en el Sistema Nacional de Salud español. Métodos: Se diseñó un cuestionario para realizar una serie de entrevistas semiestructuradas con profesionales de farmacia hospitalaria, laboratorio y oncología de hospitales españoles de Madrid, Aragón, Castilla-La Mancha, Castilla y León, Cataluña, La Rioja, País Vasco y Navarra. El criterio de selección fue de conveniencia. El periodo de realización de las entrevistas fue de abril a noviembre de 2017. Se efectuó un análisis cualitativo a partir de las respuestas de 14 entrevistas. Resultados: Todos los encuestados afirmaron que los CRC permiten mejorar la gestión económica y administrativa del hospital, destacando el control presupuestario, la obtención de financiación y la posibilidad de ahorro como ventajas principales. Los CRC son percibidos (13 de 14 entrevistados) como acuerdos con implicaciones positivas para la salud porque aumentaban el portfolio de tratamientos disponibles y porque los tratamientos introducidos contaban con una mayor eficacia. La necesidad de los CRC de registrar a los pacientes implicaba un seguimiento y control que también se entendió contribuía a la mejora de su salud. Además, los CRC se creyó (8 de 14 entrevistados) que favorecían la introducción de la medicina personalizada (MP) ya que tanto la MP como los CRC dependen e impulsan la elaboración de pruebas diagnósticas, ya sea por motivos de cribado (MP) o de aumentar las evidencias clínicas para mejorar los resultados económicos (CRC). No obstante, se consideró que la firma de los CRC conlleva la necesidad de modificar ciertas normativas (5 de 14 entrevistados), de aumentar las plantillas para encargarse de tareas burocráticas, como la elaboración de registros, y también de incrementar las pruebas de laboratorio, lo cual puede complicar la gestión sanitaria. Conclusiones: En general, los CRC contaron con opiniones positivas acerca de su aplicación aunque deba trabajarse para mejorar el contexto normativo y organizativo de modo que la complejidad adicional que incorporan no constituya una traba para extender su uso. Además, se detectaron sinergias entre los CRC y la MP

Background: Risk-sharing contracts (RSC) present a novel management tool, which link the payment to the pharmaceutical company to health outcomes. The objective of this work was to know the perception of health professionals about the utility of these agreements in the Spanish National Health System. Methods: A questionnaire was designed to conduct a series of semi-structured interviews with hospital pharmacy, laboratory and oncology professionals from Spanish hospitals in Madrid, Aragón, Castilla-La Mancha, Castilla y León, Cataluña, La Rioja, País Vasco and Navarra. The selection criteria was for convenience. The interview period was from April to November 2017. A qualitative analysis was performed based on the responses from 14 interviews. Results: All the surveyed affirmed that the CRCs allow to improve the economic and administrative management of the hospital, emphasizing as main advantages the budgetary control, the obtaining of funding and the savings possibilities. CRCs are perceived (13 of 14 respondents) as agreements with positive health implications because they increased the portfolio of treatments and had greater efficacy. The need for CRCs to register patients, involved monitoring and control, also contributed to the improvement of their health. In addition, CRCs were believed (8 out of 14 respondents) to facilitate the introduction of personalized medicine (MP) as both depend on diagnostic tests, one for screening reasons (MP) and the other for obtain clinical evidences that improve economic outcomes (CRC). However, it was considered that signing the CRCs entails the need to modify certain regulations (5 out of 14 respondents) as well as to increase the number of staff to handle bureaucratic tasks and to increase laboratory tests, which can complicate health management. Conclusions: Qualitative social research techniques have proven to be useful for gathering information on a new topic and understanding the perception of the advantages and disadvantages of CRCs, as well as their association with the MP. In addition, synergies were detected between the CRCs and the MP. Respondents had positive opinions on CRCs about its application, although work must be done in order to improve the normative and organizational context so that the additional complexity that they incorporate does not constitute an obstacle to extend its use