Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 48
Filtrar
1.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0254698, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34383776

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Pneumonia is a common and severe complication of abdominal surgery, it is associated with increased length of hospital stay, healthcare costs, and mortality. Further, pulmonary complication rates have risen during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This study explored the potential cost-effectiveness of administering preoperative chlorhexidine mouthwash versus no-mouthwash at reducing postoperative pneumonia among abdominal surgery patients. METHODS: A decision analytic model taking the South African healthcare provider perspective was constructed to compare costs and benefits of mouthwash versus no-mouthwash-surgery at 30 days after abdominal surgery. We assumed two scenarios: (i) the absence of COVID-19; (ii) the presence of COVID-19. Input parameters were collected from published literature including prospective cohort studies and expert opinion. Effectiveness was measured as proportion of pneumonia patients. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the impact of parameter uncertainties. The results of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis were presented using cost-effectiveness planes and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. RESULTS: In the absence of COVID-19, mouthwash had lower average costs compared to no-mouthwash-surgery, $3,675 (R 63,770) versus $3,958 (R 68,683), and lower proportion of pneumonia patients, 0.029 versus 0.042 (dominance of mouthwash intervention). In the presence of COVID-19, the increase in pneumonia rate due to COVID-19, made mouthwash more dominant as it was more beneficial to reduce pneumonia patients through administering mouthwash. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curves shown that mouthwash surgery is likely to be cost-effective between $0 (R0) and $15,000 (R 260,220) willingness to pay thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: Both the absence and presence of SARS-CoV-2, mouthwash is likely to be cost saving intervention for reducing pneumonia after abdominal surgery. However, the available evidence for the effectiveness of mouthwash was extrapolated from cardiac surgery; there is now an urgent need for a robust clinical trial on the intervention on non-cardiac surgery.


Assuntos
Abdome/cirurgia , Clorexidina/uso terapêutico , Modelos Teóricos , Pneumonia/prevenção & controle , COVID-19 , Análise Custo-Benefício , Humanos , Antissépticos Bucais , Pandemias , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Cuidados Pré-Operatórios , Estudos Prospectivos , África do Sul
2.
Int J Technol Assess Health Care ; 37: e43, 2021 Mar 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33686927

RESUMO

AbstractThe rapid spread of the current COVID-19 pandemic has affected societies worldwide, leading to excess mortality, long-lasting health consequences, strained healthcare systems, and additional strains and spillover effects on other sectors outside health (i.e., intersectoral costs and benefits). In this perspective piece, we demonstrate the broader societal impacts of COVID-19 on other sectors outside the health sector and the growing importance of capturing these in health economic analyses. These broader impacts include, for instance, the effects on the labor market and productivity, education, criminal justice, housing, consumption, and environment. The current pandemic highlights the importance of adopting a societal perspective to consider these broader impacts of public health issues and interventions and only omit these where it can be clearly justified as appropriate to do so. Furthermore, we explain how the COVID-19 pandemic exposed and exacerbated existing deep-rooted structural inequalities that contribute to the wider societal impacts of the pandemic.


Assuntos
COVID-19/economia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Efeitos Psicossociais da Doença , Economia Médica/organização & administração , Custos e Análise de Custo , Educação/economia , Eficiência , Humanos , Modelos Econômicos , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Recursos Humanos/economia
3.
Lancet ; 396(10253): 770-778, 2020 09 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32853559

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The anti-progesterone drug mifepristone and the prostaglandin misoprostol can be used to treat missed miscarriage. However, it is unclear whether a combination of mifepristone and misoprostol is more effective than administering misoprostol alone. We investigated whether treatment with mifepristone plus misoprostol would result in a higher rate of completion of missed miscarriage compared with misoprostol alone. METHODS: MifeMiso was a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial in 28 UK hospitals. Women were eligible for enrolment if they were aged 16 years and older, diagnosed with a missed miscarriage by pelvic ultrasound scan in the first 14 weeks of pregnancy, chose to have medical management of miscarriage, and were willing and able to give informed consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to a single dose of oral mifepristone 200 mg or an oral placebo tablet, both followed by a single dose of vaginal, oral, or sublingual misoprostol 800 µg 2 days later. Randomisation was managed via a secure web-based randomisation program, with minimisation to balance study group assignments according to maternal age (<30 years vs ≥30 years), body-mass index (<35 kg/m2vs ≥35 kg/m2), previous parity (nulliparous women vs parous women), gestational age (<70 days vs ≥70 days), amount of bleeding (Pictorial Blood Assessment Chart score; ≤2 vs ≥3), and randomising centre. Participants, clinicians, pharmacists, trial nurses, and midwives were masked to study group assignment throughout the trial. The primary outcome was failure to spontaneously pass the gestational sac within 7 days after random assignment. Primary analyses were done according to intention-to-treat principles. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN17405024. FINDINGS: Between Oct 3, 2017, and July 22, 2019, 2595 women were identified as being eligible for the MifeMiso trial. 711 women were randomly assigned to receive either mifepristone and misoprostol (357 women) or placebo and misoprostol (354 women). 696 (98%) of 711 women had available data for the primary outcome. 59 (17%) of 348 women in the mifepristone plus misoprostol group did not pass the gestational sac spontaneously within 7 days versus 82 (24%) of 348 women in the placebo plus misoprostol group (risk ratio [RR] 0·73, 95% CI 0·54-0·99; p=0·043). 62 (17%) of 355 women in the mifepristone plus misoprostol group required surgical intervention to complete the miscarriage versus 87 (25%) of 353 women in the placebo plus misoprostol group (0·71, 0·53-0·95; p=0·021). We found no difference in incidence of adverse events between the study groups. INTERPRETATION: Treatment with mifepristone plus misoprostol was more effective than misoprostol alone in the management of missed miscarriage. Women with missed miscarriage should be offered mifepristone pretreatment before misoprostol to increase the chance of successful miscarriage management, while reducing the need for miscarriage surgery. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.


Assuntos
Aborto Retido/tratamento farmacológico , Mifepristona/uso terapêutico , Misoprostol/uso terapêutico , Ocitócicos/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Método Duplo-Cego , Quimioterapia Combinada , Humanos , Resultado do Tratamento
4.
EClinicalMedicine ; 24: 100420, 2020 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32637898

RESUMO

Background: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a hospital acquired disease associated with significant morbidity, hospitalisation and mortality. Almost 30% of treated patients experience at least one recurrence after treatment of their first episode. Treatment of recurrent CDI (rCDI) utilises vancomycin or fidaxomicin, however, a newer treatment option is faecal microbial transplantation (FMT) administered by nasogastric tube (NGT) or colonoscopy. It is associated with higher cure and lower recurrence rates than fidaxomicin or vancomycin. The aim of this analysis is to evaluate the cost effectiveness of FMT for rCDI using the latest and best evidence. Method: A cost utility analysis was conducted using a decision model representing the cost per additional Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective. A Markov model was constructed to compare FMT NGT and colonoscopy to antibiotic treatment (fidaxomicin or vancomycin). The model was informed by a literature review of clinical evidence, specifically focussing on hospitalised patients with rCDI over 65 years. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess uncertainties around the model inputs and assumptions. Findings: The base case analysis showed that FMT is a less costly and more effective treatment than either fidaxomicin or vancomycin. FMT colonoscopy was slightly more effective than FMT NGT leading to an additional 0.012 QALYs but more expensive and the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £242,514/QALY. The Probabilistic sensitivity analysis based on 10,000 simulations suggested the probability of FMT NGT being cost effective was almost 78% at £20,000/QALY Willingness-To-Pay (WTP) threshold. Interpretation: FMT is both more effective and less costly option than antimicrobial therapy. FMT NGT was the preferred route of administration and is likely to be considered the most cost-effective strategy by decision makers given current acceptable thresholds.

5.
Health Technol Assess ; 24(33): 1-70, 2020 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32609084

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Progesterone is essential for a healthy pregnancy. Several small trials have suggested that progesterone therapy may rescue a pregnancy in women with early pregnancy bleeding, which is a symptom that is strongly associated with miscarriage. OBJECTIVES: (1) To assess the effects of vaginal micronised progesterone in women with vaginal bleeding in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. (2) To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of progesterone in women with early pregnancy bleeding. DESIGN: A multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial of progesterone in women with early pregnancy vaginal bleeding. SETTING: A total of 48 hospitals in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 16-39 years with early pregnancy bleeding. INTERVENTIONS: Women aged 16-39 years were randomly assigned to receive twice-daily vaginal suppositories containing either 400 mg of progesterone or a matched placebo from presentation to 16 weeks of gestation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was live birth at ≥ 34 weeks. In addition, a within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from an NHS and NHS/Personal Social Services perspective. RESULTS: A total of 4153 women from 48 hospitals in the UK received either progesterone (n = 2079) or placebo (n = 2074). The follow-up rate for the primary outcome was 97.2% (4038 out of 4153 participants). The live birth rate was 75% (1513 out of 2025 participants) in the progesterone group and 72% (1459 out of 2013 participants) in the placebo group (relative rate 1.03, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.07; p = 0.08). A significant subgroup effect (interaction test p = 0.007) was identified for prespecified subgroups by the number of previous miscarriages: none (74% in the progesterone group vs. 75% in the placebo group; relative rate 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.04; p = 0.72); one or two (76% in the progesterone group vs. 72% in the placebo group; relative rate 1.05, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.12; p = 0.07); and three or more (72% in the progesterone group vs. 57% in the placebo group; relative rate 1.28, 95% confidence interval 1.08 to 1.51; p = 0.004). A significant post hoc subgroup effect (interaction test p = 0.01) was identified in the subgroup of participants with early pregnancy bleeding and any number of previous miscarriage(s) (75% in the progesterone group vs. 70% in the placebo group; relative rate 1.09, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.15; p = 0.003). There were no significant differences in the rate of adverse events between the groups. The results of the health economics analysis show that progesterone was more costly than placebo (£7655 vs. £7572), with a mean cost difference of £83 (adjusted mean difference £76, 95% confidence interval -£559 to £711) between the two arms. Thus, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of progesterone compared with placebo was estimated as £3305 per additional live birth at ≥ 34 weeks of gestation. CONCLUSIONS: Progesterone therapy in the first trimester of pregnancy did not result in a significantly higher rate of live births among women with threatened miscarriage overall, but an important subgroup effect was identified. A conclusion on the cost-effectiveness of the PRISM trial would depend on the amount that society is willing to pay to increase the chances of an additional live birth at ≥ 34 weeks. For future work, we plan to conduct an individual participant data meta-analysis using all existing data sets. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14163439, EudraCT 2014-002348-42 and Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) 158326. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 33. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

6.
PLoS One ; 15(6): e0232960, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32497086

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) is a worldwide problem which has morbidity, mortality and financial consequences. The incidence rate of SSI is high in Low- and Middle-Income countries (LMICs) compared to high income countries, and the costly surgical complication can raise the potential risk of financial catastrophe. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to critically appraise studies on the cost of SSI in a range of LMIC studies and compare these estimates with a reference standard of high income European studies who have explored similar SSI costs. METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken using searches of two electronic databases, EMBASE and MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, up to February 2019. Study characteristics, comparator group, methods and results were extracted by using a standard template. RESULTS: Studies from 15 LMIC and 16 European countries were identified and reviewed in full. The additional cost of SSI range (presented in 2017 international dollars) was similar in the LMIC ($174-$29,610) and European countries ($21-$34,000). Huge study design heterogeneity was encountered across the two settings. DISCUSSION: SSIs were revealed to have a significant cost burden in both LMICs and High Income Countries in Europe. The magnitude of the costs depends on the SSI definition used, severity of SSI, patient population, choice of comparator, hospital setting, and cost items included. Differences in study design affected the comparability across studies. There is need for multicentre studies with standardized data collection methods to capture relevant costs and consequences of the infection across income settings.


Assuntos
Efeitos Psicossociais da Doença , Países em Desenvolvimento/economia , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica/epidemiologia , Países Desenvolvidos/economia , Saúde Global , Gastos em Saúde , Recursos em Saúde/economia , Humanos , Incidência , Renda , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica/economia
7.
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed ; 105(6): 587-592, 2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32241810

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two rates of enteral feed advancement (18 vs 30 mL/kg/day) in very preterm and very low birth weight infants. DESIGN: Within-trial economic evaluation alongside a multicentre, two-arm parallel group, randomised controlled trial (Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial). SETTING: 55 UK neonatal units from May 2013 to June 2015. PATIENTS: Infants born <32 weeks' gestation or <1500 g, receiving less than 30 mL/kg/day of milk at trial enrolment. Infants with a known severe congenital anomaly, no realistic chance of survival, or unlikely to be traceable for follow-up, were ineligible. INTERVENTIONS: When clinicians were ready to start advancing feed volumes, infants were randomised to receive daily increments in feed volume of 30 mL/kg (intervention) or 18 mL/kg (control). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Cost per additional survivor without moderate to severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months of age corrected for prematurity. RESULTS: Average costs per infant were slightly higher for faster feeds compared with slower feeds (mean difference £267, 95% CI -6928 to 8117). Fewer infants achieved the principal outcome of survival without moderate to severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months in the faster feeds arm (802/1224 vs 848/1246). The stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis showed a likelihood of worse outcomes for faster feeds compared with slower feeds. CONCLUSIONS: The stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis shows faster feeds are broadly equivalent on cost grounds. However, in terms of outcomes at 24 months age (corrected for prematurity), faster feeds are harmful. Faster feeds should not be recommended on either cost or effectiveness grounds to achieve the primary outcome.


Assuntos
Análise Custo-Benefício , Custos Diretos de Serviços , Nutrição Enteral/economia , Nutrição Enteral/métodos , Lactente Extremamente Prematuro , Recém-Nascido de muito Baixo Peso , Deficiências do Desenvolvimento/diagnóstico , Deficiências do Desenvolvimento/prevenção & controle , Idade Gestacional , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
8.
Am J Obstet Gynecol ; 223(2): 167-176, 2020 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32008730

RESUMO

Progesterone is essential for the maintenance of pregnancy. Several small trials have suggested that progesterone supplementation may reduce the risk of miscarriage in women with recurrent or threatened miscarriage. Cochrane Reviews summarized the evidence and found that the trials were small with substantial methodologic weaknesses. Since then, the effects of first-trimester use of vaginal micronized progesterone have been evaluated in 2 large, high-quality, multicenter placebo-controlled trials, one targeting women with unexplained recurrent miscarriages (the PROMISE [PROgesterone in recurrent MIScarriagE] trial) and the other targeting women with early pregnancy bleeding (the PRISM [PRogesterone In Spontaneous Miscarriage] trial). The PROMISE trial studied 836 women from 45 hospitals in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands and found a 3% greater live birth rate with progesterone but with substantial statistical uncertainty. The PRISM trial studied 4153 women from 48 hospitals in the United Kingdom and found a 3% greater live birth rate with progesterone, but with a P value of .08. A key finding, first observed in the PROMISE trial, and then replicated in the PRISM trial, was that treatment with vaginal micronized progesterone 400 mg twice daily was associated with increasing live birth rates according to the number of previous miscarriages. Prespecified PRISM trial subgroup analysis in women with the dual risk factors of previous miscarriage(s) and current pregnancy bleeding fulfilled all 11 conditions for credible subgroup analysis. For the subgroup of women with a history of 1 or more miscarriage(s) and current pregnancy bleeding, the live birth rate was 75% (689/914) with progesterone vs 70% (619/886) with placebo (rate difference 5%; risk ratio, 1.09, 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.15; P=.003). The benefit was greater for the subgroup of women with 3 or more previous miscarriages and current pregnancy bleeding; live birth rate was 72% (98/137) with progesterone vs 57% (85/148) with placebo (rate difference 15%; risk ratio, 1.28, 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.51; P=.004). No short-term safety concerns were identified from the PROMISE and PRISM trials. Therefore, women with a history of miscarriage who present with bleeding in early pregnancy may benefit from the use of vaginal micronized progesterone 400 mg twice daily. Women and their care providers should use the findings for shared decision-making.


Assuntos
Aborto Habitual/prevenção & controle , Ameaça de Aborto/tratamento farmacológico , Progesterona/uso terapêutico , Progestinas/uso terapêutico , Administração Intravaginal , Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Primeiro Trimestre da Gravidez , Progesterona/administração & dosagem , Progestinas/administração & dosagem , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Resultado do Tratamento
9.
Eur J Cancer ; 123: 130-137, 2019 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31689678

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Mammographic screening reduces breast cancer mortality but may lead to the overdiagnosis and overtreatment of low-risk breast cancers. Conservative management may reduce the potential harm of overtreatment, yet little is known about the impact upon quality of life. OBJECTIVES: To quantify women's preferences for managing low-risk screen detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), including the acceptability of active monitoring as an alternative treatment. METHODS: Utilities (cardinal measures of quality of life) were elicited from 172 women using visual analogue scales (VASs), standard gambles, and the Euro-Qol-5D-5L questionnaire for seven health states describing treatments for low-risk DCIS. Sociodemographics and breast cancer history were examined as predictors of utility. RESULTS: Both patients and non-patients valued active monitoring more favourably on average than conventional treatment. Utilities were lowest for DCIS treated with mastectomy (VAS: 0.454) or breast conserving surgery (BCS) with adjuvant radiotherapy (VAS: 0.575). The utility of active monitoring was comparable to BCS alone but was rated more favourably as progression risk was reduced from 40% to 10%. Disutility for active monitoring was likely driven by anxiety around progression, whereas conventional management impacted other dimensions of quality of life. The heterogeneity between individual preferences could not be explained by sociodemographic variables, suggesting that the factors influencing women's preferences are complex. CONCLUSIONS: Active monitoring of low-risk DCIS is likely to be an acceptable alternative for reducing the impact of overdiagnosis and overtreatment in terms of quality of life. Further research is required to determine subgroups more likely to opt for conservative management.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/terapia , Carcinoma Intraductal não Infiltrante/terapia , Preferência do Paciente , Qualidade de Vida , Conduta Expectante , Idoso , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Carcinoma Intraductal não Infiltrante/diagnóstico por imagem , Gerenciamento Clínico , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Mastectomia , Mastectomia Segmentar , Sobremedicalização , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde , Radioterapia Adjuvante
10.
Lancet Glob Health ; 7(9): e1280-e1286, 2019 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31402008

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There is ongoing debate on the clinical benefits of antibiotic prophylaxis for reducing pelvic infection after miscarriage surgery. We aimed to study the cost-effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in the surgical management of miscarriage in low-income countries. METHODS: We did an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis using data from 3412 women recruited to the AIMS trial, a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial designed to evaluate the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in the surgical management of miscarriage in Malawi, Pakistan, Tanzania, and Uganda. Economic evaluation was done from a health-care-provider perspective on the basis of the outcome of cost per pelvic infection avoided within 2 weeks of surgery. Pelvic infection was broadly defined by the presence of clinical features or the clinically identified need to administer antibiotics. We used non-parametric bootstrapping and multilevel random effects models to estimate incremental mean costs and outcomes. Decision uncertainty was shown via cost-effectiveness acceptability frontiers. The AIMS trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN97143849. FINDINGS: Between June 2, 2014, and April 26, 2017, 3412 women were assigned to receive either antibiotic prophylaxis (1705 [50%] of 3412) or placebo (1707 [50%] of 3412) in the AIMS trial. 158 (5%) of 3412 women developed pelvic infection within 2 weeks of surgery, of whom 68 (43%) were in the antibiotic prophylaxis group and 90 (57%) in the placebo group. There is 97-98% probability that antibiotic prophylaxis is a cost-effective intervention at expected thresholds of willingness-to-pay per additional pelvic infection avoided. In terms of post-surgery antibiotics, the antibiotic prophylaxis group was US$0·27 (95% CI -0·49 to -0·05) less expensive per woman than the placebo group. A secondary analysis, a sensitivity analysis, and all subgroup analyses supported these findings. Antibiotic prophylaxis, if implemented routinely before miscarriage surgery, could translate to an annual total cost saving of up to $1·4 million across the four participating countries and up to $8·5 million across the two regions of sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia. INTERPRETATION: Antibiotic prophylaxis is more effective and less expensive than no antibiotic prophylaxis. Policy makers in various settings should be confident that antibiotic prophylaxis in miscarriage surgery is cost-effective. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, and the UK Department for International Development.


Assuntos
Aborto Espontâneo/cirurgia , Antibioticoprofilaxia/economia , Adolescente , Adulto , Análise Custo-Benefício , Países em Desenvolvimento , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Humanos , Malaui , Paquistão , Gravidez , Tanzânia , Resultado do Tratamento , Uganda , Adulto Jovem
11.
Lancet ; 393(10190): 2511-2520, 2019 06 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31056291

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Gonorrhoea is a common sexually transmitted infection for which ceftriaxone is the current first-line treatment, but antimicrobial resistance is emerging. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of gentamicin as an alternative to ceftriaxone (both combined with azithromycin) for treatment of gonorrhoea. METHODS: G-ToG was a multicentre, parallel-group, pragmatic, randomised, non-inferiority trial comparing treatment with gentamicin to treatment with ceftriaxone for patients with gonorrhoea. The patients, treating physician, and assessing physician were masked to treatment but the treating nurse was not. The trial took place at 14 sexual health clinics in England. Adults aged 16-70 years were eligible for participation if they had a diagnosis of uncomplicated genital, pharyngeal, or rectal gonorrhoea. Participants were randomly assigned to receive a single intramuscular dose of either gentamicin 240 mg (gentamicin group) or ceftriaxone 500 mg (ceftriaxone group). All participants also received a single 1 g dose of oral azithromycin. Randomisation (1:1) was stratified by clinic and performed using a secure web-based system. The primary outcome was clearance of Neisseria gonorrhoeae at all initially infected sites, defined as a negative nucleic acid amplification test 2 weeks post treatment. Primary outcome analyses included only participants who had follow-up data, irrespective of the baseline visit N gonorrhoeae test result. The margin used to establish non-inferiority was a lower confidence limit of 5% for the risk difference. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN51783227. FINDINGS: Of 1762 patients assessed, we enrolled 720 participants between Oct 7, 2014, and Nov 14, 2016, and randomly assigned 358 to gentamicin and 362 to ceftriaxone. Primary outcome data were available for 306 (85%) of 362 participants allocated to ceftriaxone and 292 (82%) of 358 participants allocated to gentamicin. At 2 weeks after treatment, infection had cleared for 299 (98%) of 306 participants in the ceftriaxone group compared with 267 (91%) of 292 participants in the gentamicin group (adjusted risk difference -6·4%, 95% CI -10·4% to -2·4%). Of the 328 participants who had a genital infection, 151 (98%) of 154 in the ceftriaxone group and 163 (94%) of 174 in the gentamicin group had clearance at follow-up (adjusted risk difference -4·4%, -8·7 to 0). For participants with a pharyngeal infection, a greater proportion receiving ceftriaxone had clearance at follow-up (108 [96%] in the ceftriaxone group compared with 82 [80%] in the gentamicin group; adjusted risk difference -15·3%, -24·0 to -6·5). Similarly, a greater proportion of participants with rectal infection in the ceftriaxone group had clearance (134 [98%] in the ceftriaxone group compared with 107 [90%] in the gentamicin group; adjusted risk difference -7·8%, -13·6 to -2·0). Thus, we did not find that a single dose of gentamicin 240 mg was non-inferior to a single dose of ceftriaxone 500 mg for the treatment of gonorrhoea, when both drugs were combined with a 1 g dose of oral azithromycin. The side-effect profiles were similar between groups, although severity of pain at the injection site was higher for gentamicin (mean visual analogue pain score 36 of 100 in the gentamicin group vs 21 of 100 in the ceftriaxone group). INTERPRETATION: Gentamicin is not appropriate as first-line treatment for gonorrhoea but remains potentially useful for patients with isolated genital infection, or for patients who are allergic or intolerant to ceftriaxone, or harbour a ceftriaxone-resistant isolate. Further research is required to identify and test new alternatives to ceftriaxone for the treatment of gonorrhoea. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research.


Assuntos
Azitromicina/administração & dosagem , Ceftriaxona/administração & dosagem , Gentamicinas/administração & dosagem , Gonorreia/tratamento farmacológico , Doenças Faríngeas/tratamento farmacológico , Doenças Faríngeas/microbiologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Azitromicina/uso terapêutico , Ceftriaxona/uso terapêutico , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Quimioterapia Combinada , Inglaterra , Feminino , Gentamicinas/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto Jovem
12.
Soc Sci Med ; 228: 142-154, 2019 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30913528

RESUMO

Policy decisions regarding breast cancer screening and treatment programmes may be misplaced unless the decision process includes the appropriate utilities and disutilities of mammography screening and its sequelae. The objectives of this study were to critically review how economic evaluations have valued the health states associated with breast cancer screening, and appraise the primary evidence informing health state utility values (cardinal measures of quality of life). A systematic review was conducted up to September 2018 of studies that elicited or used utilities relevant to mammography screening. The methods used to elicit utilities and the quality of the reported values were tabulated and analysed narratively. 40 economic evaluations of breast cancer screening programmes and 10 primary studies measuring utilities for health states associated with mammography were reviewed in full. The economic evaluations made different assumptions about the measures used, duration applied and the sequalae included in each health state. 22 evaluations referenced utilities based on assumptions or used measures that were not methodologically appropriate. There was significant heterogeneity in the utilities generated by the 10 primary studies, including the methods and population used to derive them. No study asked women to explicitly consider the risk of overdiagnosis when valuing the health states described. Utilities informing breast screening policy are restricted in their ability to reflect the full benefits and harms. Evaluating the true cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening will remain problematic, unless the methodological challenges associated with valuing the disutilities of screening are adequately addressed.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico , Programas de Rastreamento/economia , Adulto , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/economia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Feminino , Financiamento da Assistência à Saúde , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/tendências , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida
13.
BMJ Open ; 9(2): e022352, 2019 02 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30782867

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of routine use of cell salvage during caesarean section in mothers at risk of haemorrhage compared with current standard of care. DESIGN: Model-based cost-effectiveness evaluation alongside a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Three main analyses were carried out on the trial data: (1) based on the intention-to-treat principle; (2) based on the per-protocol principle; (3) only participants who underwent an emergency caesarean section. SETTING: 26 obstetric units in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: 3028 women at risk of haemorrhage recruited between June 2013 and April 2016. INTERVENTIONS: Cell salvage (intervention) versus routine care without salvage (control). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost-effectiveness based on incremental cost per donor blood transfusion avoided. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, the mean difference in total costs between cell salvage and standard care was £83. The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £8110 per donor blood transfusion avoided. For the per-protocol analysis, the mean difference in total costs was £92 and the ICER was £8252. In the emergency caesarean section analysis, the mean difference in total costs was £55 and the ICER was £13 713 per donor blood transfusion avoided. This ICER is driven by the increased probability that these patients would require a higher level of postoperative care and additional surgeries. The results of these analyses were shown to be robust for the majority of deterministic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the economic evaluation suggest that while routine cell salvage is a marginally more effective strategy than standard care in avoiding a donor blood transfusion, there is uncertainty in relation to whether it is a less or more costly strategy. The lack of long-term data on the health and quality of life of patients in both arms of the trial means that further research is needed to fully understand the cost implications of both strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN66118656.


Assuntos
Transfusão de Sangue/estatística & dados numéricos , Cesárea/métodos , Hemorragia/terapia , Recuperação de Sangue Operatório/estatística & dados numéricos , Transfusão de Sangue/métodos , Cesárea/efeitos adversos , Análise Custo-Benefício , Feminino , Hemorragia/etiologia , Humanos , Recuperação de Sangue Operatório/efeitos adversos , Recuperação de Sangue Operatório/métodos , Gravidez , Qualidade de Vida , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Reino Unido
14.
Pharmacoecon Open ; 3(2): 163-176, 2019 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30506157

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate the relative cost effectiveness for the full range of uterotonic drugs available for preventing postpartum haemorrhage (PPH). METHODS: A model-based economic evaluation was constructed using effectiveness data from a network meta-analysis, and supplemented by the literature. A UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective was adopted for the analysis, which is based on UK costs from published sources. The primary outcome measure is cost per case of PPH avoided (≥ 500 mL blood loss), with secondary outcome measures of cost per case of severe PPH avoided (≥ 1000 mL) and cost per major outcome (surgery) averted also being analysed. RESULTS: Carbetocin is shown to be the most effective strategy. Excluding adverse events, 'ergometrine plus oxytocin' was shown to be the least costly strategy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for prevention of PPH with carbetocin compared with prevention with 'ergometrine plus oxytocin' was £1889 per case of PPH ≥ 500 mL avoided; £30,013 per case of PPH ≥ 1000 mL avoided; and £1,172,378 per major outcome averted. Including adverse events in the analysis showed oxytocin to be the least costly strategy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for prevention of PPH with carbetocin compared with prevention with oxytocin was £928 per case of PPH ≥ 500 mL avoided; £22,900 per case of PPH ≥ 1000 mL avoided; and £894,514 per major outcome averted. CONCLUSION: The results suggest carbetocin, oxytocin and 'ergometrine plus oxytocin' could all be favourable options for being the most cost-effective strategy for preventing PPH. Carbetocin could be the preferred choice, especially if the price of carbetocin decreased. Mixed findings mean a clear-cut conclusion cannot be made as to which uterotonic is the most cost effective. Future research should focus on collecting more robust evidence on the probability of having adverse events from the uterotonic drugs, and on adapting the model for low- and middle-income countries.

15.
Trials ; 19(1): 531, 2018 Oct 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30285835

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Forty percent of babies who are stillborn born die after 36 weeks gestation and have no lethal structural abnormality. Maternal perception of reduced fetal movement (RFM) is associated with stillbirth and is related to abnormal placental structure and function. The ultimate objective of this trial is to assess whether for women with RFM, intervention directed by measurement of placental biochemical factors in addition to standard care improves pregnancy outcome compared with standard care alone. This is the protocol for a pilot trial to determine the feasibility of a definitive trial and also provide proof of concept that informing care by measurement of placental factors improves neonatal outcomes. METHODS: ReMIT-2 is a multicentre, pilot randomised controlled trial of care informed by results of an additional placental factor blood test versus standard care alone for women presenting with RFM at or after 36+ 0 weeks gestation. Participants will be randomised 1:1 to the intervention arm where the blood test result is revealed and acted on, or to the control arm where the blood sample is not tested immediately and therefore the result cannot be acted on. All participants will be followed up six weeks after delivery to assess their health status and views of the trial, along with healthcare costs. A sub-group will be interviewed within 16 weeks after delivery to further explore their views of the trial. Outcomes to determine feasibility of a definitive trial include number of potentially eligible women, proportion lost to follow-up, clinical characteristics at randomisation, reasons for non-recruitment, compliance with the trial intervention and views of participants and clinicians about the trial. Proof of concept outcomes include: rates of induction of labour; Caesarean birth; and a composite neonatal outcome of stillbirths and deaths before discharge, 5-min Apgar score < 7, umbilical artery pH < 7.05 and admission to neonatal unit for > 48 h. DISCUSSION: Results from this pilot trial will help determine whether a large definitive trial is feasible. Such a study would provide evidence to guide management of women with RFM and reduce stillbirths. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN12067514 . Registered on 8 September 2017.


Assuntos
Sofrimento Fetal/diagnóstico , Movimento Fetal , Fator de Crescimento Placentário/sangue , Natimorto , Biomarcadores/sangue , Estudos de Viabilidade , Feminino , Sofrimento Fetal/sangue , Sofrimento Fetal/fisiopatologia , Idade Gestacional , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Lactente , Mortalidade Infantil , Recém-Nascido , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Projetos Piloto , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Gravidez , Resultado da Gravidez , Terceiro Trimestre da Gravidez/sangue , Estudo de Prova de Conceito , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Reino Unido
16.
J Antimicrob Chemother ; 73(11): 3189-3198, 2018 11 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30165522

RESUMO

Objectives: Overprescribing of antibiotics by general practitioners (GPs) is seen as a major driver of antibiotic resistance. Training in communication skills and C-reactive protein (CRP) testing both appear effective in reducing such prescribing. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness (compared with usual care) of: (i) training GPs in the use of CRP testing; (ii) training GPs in communication skills; and (iii) training GPs in both CRP testing and communication skills. Methods: Economic analyses [cost-utility analysis (CUA) accounting for the cost of antibiotic resistance and cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA)] were both conducted from a healthcare perspective with a time horizon of 28 days alongside a multinational, cluster, randomized, factorial controlled trial in patients with respiratory tract infections in five European countries. The primary outcome measures were QALYs and percentage reduction in antibiotic prescribing. Hierarchical modelling was used to estimate an incremental cost per QALY gained and an incremental cost per percentage reduction in antibiotic prescribing. Results: Overall, the results of both the CUA and CEA showed that training in communication skills is the most cost-effective option. However, excluding the cost of antibiotic resistance in the CUA resulted in usual care being the most cost-effective option. Country-specific results from the CUA showed that training in communication skills was cost-effective in Belgium, UK and Netherlands whilst training in CRP was cost-effective in Poland. Conclusions: Internet-based training in communication skills is a cost-effective intervention to reduce antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections in primary care if the cost of antibiotic resistance is accounted for.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Educação/economia , Prescrição Inadequada/prevenção & controle , Internet/economia , Médicos de Atenção Primária/educação , Infecções Respiratórias/tratamento farmacológico , Proteína C-Reativa/análise , Comunicação , Análise Custo-Benefício , Europa (Continente) , Feminino , Clínicos Gerais/educação , Humanos , Masculino , Padrões de Prática Médica , Atenção Primária à Saúde/economia , Atenção Primária à Saúde/métodos , Infecções Respiratórias/diagnóstico
17.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 18(1): 179, 2018 May 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29783936

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Economic evaluations of interventions for postnatal depression (PND) are essential to ensure optimal healthcare decision-making. Due to the wide-ranging effects of PND on the mother, baby and whole family, there is a need to include outcomes for all those affected and to include health and non-health outcomes for accurate estimates of cost-effectiveness. This study aimed to identify interventions to prevent or treat PND for which an economic evaluation had been conducted and to evaluate the health and non-health outcomes included. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted applying a comprehensive search strategy across eight electronic databases and other sources. Full or partial economic evaluations of interventions involving preventive strategies (including screening), and any treatments for women with or at-risk of PND, conducted in OECD countries were included. We excluded epidemiological studies and those focussing on costs only. The included studies underwent a quality appraisal to inform the analysis. RESULTS: Seventeen economic evaluations met the inclusion criteria, the majority focused on psychological /psychosocial interventions. The interventions ranged from additional support from health professionals, peer support, to combined screening and treatment strategies. Maternal health outcomes were measured in all studies; however child health outcomes were included in only four of them. Across studies, the maternal health outcomes included were quality-adjusted-life-years gained, improvement in depressive symptoms, PND cases detected or recovered, whereas the child health outcomes included were cognitive functioning, depression, sleep and temperament. Non-health outcomes such as couples' relationships and parent-infant interaction were rarely included. Other methodological issues such as limitations in the time horizon and perspective(s) adopted were identified, that were likely to result in imprecise estimates of benefits. CONCLUSIONS: The exclusion of relevant health and non-health outcomes may mean that only a partial assessment of cost-effectiveness is undertaken, leading to sub-optimal resource allocation decisions. Future research should seek ways to expand the evaluative space of economic evaluations and explore approaches to integrate health and non-health outcomes for all individuals affected by this condition. There is a need to ensure that the time horizon adopted in studies is appropriate to allow true estimation of the long-term benefits and costs of PND interventions.


Assuntos
Análise Custo-Benefício , Depressão Pós-Parto/economia , Depressão Pós-Parto/terapia , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde/economia , Psicoterapia/economia , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Mães/psicologia , Gravidez , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida
18.
Int J STD AIDS ; 29(1): 72-79, 2018 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28669322

RESUMO

The objective was to determine whether or not the limited use of urethral microscopy to diagnose asymptomatic and symptomatic non-chlamydial, non-gonococcal urethritis (NCNGU) in men is a cost-effective strategy to avert pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), ectopic pregnancy or infertility in female partners. Outputs from a transmission dynamic model of NCNGU in a population of 16-30 year olds in England simulating the number of consultations, PID cases and patients treated over time amongst others, were used along with secondary data to undertake a cost-effectiveness analysis carried out from a health care provider perspective. The main outcome measure was cost per case of PID averted. A secondary outcome measure was cost per major outcome averted, where a major outcome is a case of symptomatic PID, ectopic pregnancy, or infertility. Offering a limited number of asymptomatic men urethral microscopy was more effective than the current practice of no microscopy in terms of reducing the number of cases of PID with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £15,700, meaning that an investment of £15,800 is required to avert one case of PID. For major outcomes averted, offering some asymptomatic men urethral microscopy was again found to be more effective than no microscopy, but here an investment of £49,900 is required to avert one major outcome. Testing asymptomatic men for NCNGU in a small number of genitourinary medicine settings in England is not cost-effective, and thus by maintaining the current practice of not offering this patient group microscopy, this continues to make savings for the health care provider.


Assuntos
Análise Custo-Benefício , Microscopia/métodos , Infecções por Mycoplasma/diagnóstico , Mycoplasma genitalium/isolamento & purificação , Doença Inflamatória Pélvica/prevenção & controle , Parceiros Sexuais , Uretrite/diagnóstico , Infecções Assintomáticas/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Microscopia/economia , Infecções por Mycoplasma/economia , Infecções por Mycoplasma/epidemiologia , Uretrite/epidemiologia , Uretrite/microbiologia
19.
PLoS Med ; 14(12): e1002471, 2017 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29261655

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Excessive haemorrhage at cesarean section requires donor (allogeneic) blood transfusion. Cell salvage may reduce this requirement. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (at 26 obstetric units; participants recruited from 4 June 2013 to 17 April 2016) of routine cell salvage use (intervention) versus current standard of care without routine salvage use (control) in cesarean section among women at risk of haemorrhage. Randomisation was stratified, using random permuted blocks of variable sizes. In an intention-to-treat analysis, we used multivariable models, adjusting for stratification variables and prognostic factors identified a priori, to compare rates of donor blood transfusion (primary outcome) and fetomaternal haemorrhage ≥2 ml in RhD-negative women with RhD-positive babies (a secondary outcome) between groups. Among 3,028 women randomised (2,990 analysed), 95.6% of 1,498 assigned to intervention had cell salvage deployed (50.8% had salvaged blood returned; mean 259.9 ml) versus 3.9% of 1,492 assigned to control. Donor blood transfusion rate was 3.5% in the control group versus 2.5% in the intervention group (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42 to 1.01, p = 0.056; adjusted risk difference -1.03, 95% CI -2.13 to 0.06). In a planned subgroup analysis, the transfusion rate was 4.6% in women assigned to control versus 3.0% in the intervention group among emergency cesareans (adjusted OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.99), whereas it was 2.2% versus 1.8% among elective cesareans (adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.83) (interaction p = 0.46). No case of amniotic fluid embolism was observed. The rate of fetomaternal haemorrhage was higher with the intervention (10.5% in the control group versus 25.6% in the intervention group, adjusted OR 5.63, 95% CI 1.43 to 22.14, p = 0.013). We are unable to comment on long-term antibody sensitisation effects. CONCLUSIONS: The overall reduction observed in donor blood transfusion associated with the routine use of cell salvage during cesarean section was not statistically significant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was prospectively registered on ISRCTN as trial number 66118656 and can be viewed on http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN66118656.


Assuntos
Perda Sanguínea Cirúrgica/prevenção & controle , Transfusão de Sangue Autóloga/métodos , Cesárea , Recuperação de Sangue Operatório/métodos , Adulto , Doadores de Sangue , Cesárea/efeitos adversos , Cesárea/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Planejamento de Assistência ao Paciente , Gravidez , Prognóstico , Resultado do Tratamento
20.
Value Health ; 20(8): 1180-1197, 2017 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28964452

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: A broad literature on health state utility values exists, but compared with chronic health states (HSs), issues surrounding the valuation of temporary health states (THSs) have been poorly explored. OBJECTIVES: To assess the methods used by previous studies to value HSs that are considered temporary so as to determine the strengths and limitations associated with various approaches and to inform future study designs. METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken to explore the methods used, assess how the valuation was conducted for diseases that might lead to HSs deemed as temporary, and identify the challenges encountered in the valuation of THSs. RESULTS: Of the 36 relevant studies, 22 were explicit that the HS being valued was temporary. Most of the studies used more than one technique (often incorporating both conventional and adapted approaches). In using adapted techniques, the primary challenge was identifying an appropriate intermediate "anchor" HS and the possibility of negative utilities. CONCLUSIONS: There is no agreement on the most methodologically robust approach to THS valuation. Valuation is complex and important issues relating to the validity, practicality, and reliability of the techniques used were not adequately covered by most of the studies identified.


Assuntos
Nível de Saúde , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Projetos de Pesquisa , Análise Custo-Benefício , Custos e Análise de Custo , Humanos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...