Gastrointestinal Manifestations of Chagas Disease: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

The aims of this study were to estimate the prevalence of gastrointestinal manifestations among individuals with positive serology for Chagas disease (ChD) and to describe the clinical gastrointestinal manifestations of the disease. A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted based on the criteria and recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. The PubMed, Scopus, Virtual Health Library, Web of Science, and Embase databases were used to search for evidence. Two reviewers independently selected eligible articles and extracted data. RStudio® software was used for the meta-analysis. For subgroup analysis, the studies were divided according to the origin of the individuals included: 1) individuals from health units were included in the health care service prevalence analysis, and 2) individuals from the general population were included in the population prevalence analysis. A total of 2,570 articles were identified, but after removal of duplicates and application of inclusion criteria, 24 articles were included and 21 were part of the meta-analysis. Most of the studies were conducted in Brazil. Radiological diagnosis was the most frequent method used to identify the gastrointestinal clinical form. The combined effect of meta-analysis studies showed a prevalence of gastrointestinal manifestations in individuals with ChD of 12% (95% CI, 8.0-17.0%). In subgroup analysis, the prevalence for studies involving health care services was 16% (95% CI, 11.0-23.0%), while the prevalence for population-based studies was 9% (95% CI, 5.0-15.0%). Megaesophagus and megacolon were the main forms of ChD presentation in the gastrointestinal form. The prevalence of gastrointestinal manifestations of ChD was 12%. Knowing the prevalence of ChD in its gastrointestinal form is an important step in planning health actions for these patients.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a pharmacotherapeutic empowerment strategy for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Background: The economic feasibility of pharmacotherapeutic empowerment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) is still not well established. Objectives: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an individual pharmacotherapeutic empowerment strategy (IPES) for patients with DM2. Methods: This is a cost-effectiveness study nested in a non-randomized clinical trial with patients ≥18 years of age, of both genders, with low and moderate cardiovascular risks. This study was carried out from the perspective of the municipal health system of Divinópolis in Minas Gerais state, and compared patients submitted to an IPES and patients who received only traditional care, 1 year before the beginning of the intervention (baseline) and 1 year after its completion (follow-up). The costs of the services offered by the municipality were computed, and in the intervention group IPES costs were included. Glycated hemoglobin (A1c) was the effectiveness parameter adopted. Cost-effectiveness ratio analyses, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and sensitivity analysis were performed. Results: In the analysis of cost-effectiveness, it is observed that a reduction of 0.359 in A1c costs US$708.47 in the intervention group and a reduction of 0.170 costs US$1927.13 in the control group. Thus, the ICER is US$387.66 per patient/year. In the sensitivity analysis, it was observed that the IPES was dominant in 19.8% of the simulated scenarios and cost-effective in 80.2%. Conclusions: The IPES is an alternative that presents economic feasibility for the municipal public health system scenario. The absence of randomization in patient selection is a limitation of this study.

Patients lacking glycemic control place more burdens on health services with the use of medications.

INTRODUCTION: DM spending in the world is high, and Brazilian studies of public spending caused by DM are scarce. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the annual direct cost for the municipal health sphere, related to DM2 treatment, in patients with and without glycemic control. METHOD: A cross-sectional study carried out in a city in the interior of Minas Gerais state, with patients with DM2, being municipal PHS users. Data were collected from the computerized system of the municipality and patient records, and analyzed using the IBM SPSS v.19 statistical package. The response variable was categorized into controlled A1c (≤7%) and uncontrolled A1c (>7%). RESULTS: Glycemic control in 56.6% of the patients was unsatisfactory; the mean cost of pharmacotherapy for DM2 was US$ 3.14 per year for patients in the control group and US$ 45.54 per year for uncontrolled patients. CONCLUSION: Patients with unsatisfactory glycemic control are more expensive for the municipal health system.