Objective: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are first-line therapy for stroke prevention for 1.4 million atrial fibrillation (AF) patients in the UK. However, the rates of DOAC dosing below evidence-based recommendations are estimated between 9% and 22%. This study explores specific patient and physician factors associated with prescribing inappropriate DOAC underdoses.
Methods: DOAC-prescribing physicians within the UK completed both a clinical vignette survey, which contained 12 hypothetical patient profiles designed to replicate DOAC prescribing scenarios, and a physician survey to capture sociodemographic, clinical experience, and prescriber-related beliefs and motivations related to DOAC prescribing. Eight patient factors based on a literature search and an expert consultation process were varied within the vignettes. Associations between the prescribers' dosing choices and patient factors were explored via multilevel logistic regression. The analysis is focused on the most frequently selected DOACs, apixaban and rivaroxaban, both of which have different dosing guidelines.
Results: In all, 336 prescribers (69% male; 233/336) completed the survey, mostly general physicians (GPs) (45%) or cardiology specialists (36%) with a mean of 17.9 years' experience. Most prescribers (73%; 244/336) inappropriately underdosed at least once; rates between GPs and specialists were nearly identical. Patient factors most strongly associated with apixaban inappropriate underdosing included a history of major bleeding and falls. For rivaroxaban, these were major bleeding and severe frailty. Only 32% (106/335) of prescribers reported DOAC dosing guidelines as the sole influence on their prescribing behaviour. Among prescribers who did not inappropriately underdose, greater prescribing confidence was aligned to increased perception of inappropriate underdose risk.
Conclusions: Overall, patient factors such as major bleeding and severe frailty were found to be associated with inappropriate underdosing of apixaban and rivaroxaban. Furthermore, prescribers who were more confident in DOAC prescribing, and were more worried about the risk of stroke, were significantly less likely to inappropriately underdose. These findings suggest that all prescribers, regardless of speciality, may benefit from education and training to raise awareness of the risks associated with inappropriate DOAC underdosing.
Background: Heart failure is a chronic disease linked with significant morbidity and mortality, and uncontrolled resting heart rate is a risk factor for adverse outcomes. This systematic literature review aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of ivabradine in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Methods: We searched electronic databases from their inception to July 2021 to include studies that reported on efficacy, safety, or PROs of ivabradine in patients with HFrEF. Results: Of 1947 records screened, 51 RCTs and 6 observational studies were identified. Ivabradine on top of background therapy demonstrated a significant reduction in composite outcomes including hospitalization for HF or cardiovascular death. In addition, observational studies suggested that ivabradine was associated with a significant reduction in mortality. Across all studies, ivabradine use on top of background therapy was associated with greater reductions in heart rate, improved EF, and improved health-related quality of life (QoL) and comparable risk of total adverse events compared to those treated with background therapy alone. Conclusions: Ivabradine on top of background therapy is beneficial for heart rate, hospitalization risk for HF, mortality, EF, and patients' QoL. Moreover, these benefits were achieved with no significant increase in the overall risk of total adverse events.
Background: The benefits of preventive interventions lack comprehensive evaluation in standard health technology assessments (HTA), particularly for rare and transmissible diseases. Objective: To identify possible considerations for future HTA using analogies between the treatment and prevention of rare diseases. Study design: An Expert panel meeting assessed whether one HTA assessment framework can be applied to assess both rare disease treatments and preventive interventions. Experts also evaluated the range of value elements currently included in HTAs and their applicability to rare, transmissible, and/or preventable diseases. Results: A broad range of value should be considered when assessing rare, transmissible disease prevention. Although standard HTA can be applied to transmissible diseases, the risk of local outbreaks and the need for large-scale prevention programs suggest a modified assessment framework, capable of incorporating prevention-specific value elements in HTAs. A 'Rule of Prevention' framework was proposed to allow broader value considerations anchored to severity, equity, and prevention benefits in decision-making for preventive interventions for rare transmissible diseases. Conclusion: The proposed prevention framework introduces an explicit initial approach to consistently assess rare transmissible diseases, and to incorporate the broader value of preventive interventions compared with treatment.
Introduction: A rapid literature review (RLR) is an alternative to systematic literature review (SLR) that can speed up the analysis of newly published data. The objective was to identify and summarize available information regarding different approaches to defining RLR and the methodology applied to the conduct of such reviews. Methods: The Medline and EMBASE databases, as well as the grey literature, were searched using the set of keywords and their combination related to the targeted and rapid review, as well as design, approach, and methodology. Of the 3,898 records retrieved, 12 articles were included. Results: Specific definition of RLRs has only been developed in 2021. In terms of methodology, the RLR should be completed within shorter timeframes using simplified procedures in comparison to SLRs, while maintaining a similar level of transparency and minimizing bias. Inherent components of the RLR process should be a clear research question, search protocol, simplified process of study selection, data extraction, and quality assurance. Conclusions: There is a lack of consensus on the formal definition of the RLR and the best approaches to perform it. The evidence-based supporting methods are evolving, and more work is needed to define the most robust approaches.
Background: Gene replacement therapy (GRT) is a treatment method used to combat or prevent various diseases. Its high one-off cost constitutes a major obstacle for successful market access. This paper aims to assess and discuss the applicability of amortization in models, such as cost-effectiveness models (CEMs) and budget impact models (BIMs) informing HTA recommendations and reimbursement decisions.
Methods and findings: A hypothetical CEA and BIA were considered. The objective was to compare the GRT with and without amortization. A straight-line amortization model was used. The CEM and BIM were considered and assessed based on two set of scenarios: considering different amortization duration or different discounting rate. The impact of amortization against the total cost of gene therapy was assessed for all the scenarios. The cost difference between GRT with and without amortization in relation to its total cost was -$58,855, thus amortization does not have a significant impact on the results and conclusions of the cost-effectiveness analysis. For BIM in the base case, amortization had no impact on the results.
Conclusion: Amortization has negligible impact on the results of CEM and total BIM and no impact on the conclusions from the model. One exception is the budget impact in case of an amortization period longer than the time horizon of BIM, where a half of the GRT price is moved beyond the model time horizon. Amortization has a distinguishing effect from an accounting perspective, but it does not have any implication for payers.
Objectives: To assess the comparative budget and health impact of lower-dose dabigatran versus reduced doses of apixaban and rivaroxaban in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients eligible for a lower-/reduced-dose due to individual patient characteristics in the Netherlands. Methods: A budget impact model was developed in accordance with ISPOR guidelines. A 3-year-time horizon was considered, and analyses were conducted from a Dutch healthcare payer's perspective. The model applies published data to local AF-epidemiology, allowing calculations to estimate clinical events (strokes and haemorrhages) and costs. The analyses were based on real-world outcomes from patients with AF receiving a first direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) prescription for low-dose dabigatran (110 mg) and a reduced dose of apixaban (2.5 mg) or rivaroxaban (15 mg). Two situations of switching treatments from one to another DOAC were modelled: switching from apixaban to dabigatran and from rivaroxaban to dabigatran. Base case results were given as savings per 100 patient-year, per total Dutch population, and events avoided. A univariate sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the uncertainty around epidemiological and event costs input data. Scenario analyses were performed to estimate the effect of different market shares and potential price reductions due to future patent expiry for the total real-world population from the Netherlands. Results: The 3-years outcomes of switching patients eligible for a lower-/reduced-dose due to individual patient characteristics from apixaban or rivaroxaban to dabigatran resulted in cost savings estimated at €157 or €72 thousand per 100 patient-years, respectively, or €146 million per total Dutch population. Looking into the clinical events, dabigatran reflected the lowest number of mortalities, ischemic strokes, major bleeding, non-major bleeding, and haemorrhagic stroke compared to apixaban and rivaroxaban. The sensitivity analysis consistently reflected cost savings, with the ischeamic stroke events having the biggest impact. Accounting for the Dutch situation, both scenarios showed total savings ranging from €45 to €229 million over 3 years. Conclusions: Switching eligible AF-patients from reduced-dose apixaban or rivaroxaban to lower-dose dabigatran has the potential to reduce healthcare payer's budget expenditures and provide health gains. Cost savings can potentially be further enhanced by market share adjustments and further price reductions.
Introduction: New procedures and diagnostic tests in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) are associated with a significant increase in costs. The last cost estimate of allogeneic HSCT done in Tunisia was in 1996 and concerned only direct medical costs. Therefore, an updated cost analysis is needed. Objective: Analysis of direct costs during the first-year post-allogeneic HSCT in two groups of patients: Bone Marrow Transplant (Allo-BMT) and Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplant (Allo-PBSCT) and identification of factors leading to interindividual variations in costs in order to compare these costs with the budget allocated by the payer (CNAM). Methods: Pharmacoeconomic retrospective study, concerning patients who underwent allogeneic HSCT in 2013. Clinical and unit cost data were obtained from medical and administration records. Results:This study showed that the average direct cost of allogeneic HSCT in the population during the first year reached 56 638€. The average cost of Allo-BMT was 63 612€, and Allo-PBSCT was 45 966€ (p > 0.05). The initial hospitalization counted for 88% of total direct cost with an average cost of 41 441€ in Allo-BMT and 24 672€ in Allo-PBSCT (p < 0.05). Direct medical costs represented more than 70% of total direct costs, drugs, and laboratory tests occupied the largest share. Antifungals, antitumors, and antiviral drugs were the most expensive pharmaceutical classes with a mean cost, respectively, of 4 526€; 3 737€ and 3 268€. Some clinical criteria were significantly related to total direct costs like length of aplasia (p < 0.01) and GVHD (p < 0.05). However, the type of blood disease, its risk, length of mucositis, and the treatment protocol have no effect on the costs for all allogeneic patients. Conclusion: Our results showed that the costs of Allo HSCT have exceeded by far the budget allocated by the CNAM to the center, since the 90s to this day. That's why the total reimbursement mechanism should be revised.
Background: The increasing prevalence of obesity imposes a significant cost burden on individuals and societies worldwide.
Objective: In this nationally representative study, the association between body mass index (BMI) groups and the number of metabolic comorbidities (MetC) with total direct costs was investigated in the Finnish population.
Study design, setting, and participants: The study cohort included 5,587 adults with BMI ≥18.5 kg/m2 who participated in the cross-sectional FinHealth 2017 health examination survey conducted by the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare. Data on healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and drug purchases were collected from national healthcare and drug registers.
Main outcome measure: The primary outcome was total direct costs (costs of primary and secondary HCRU and prescription medications).
Results: Class I (BMI 30.0-34.9 kg/m2) and class II - III (BMI ≥35.0 kg/m2) obesity were associated with 43% and 40% higher age- and sex-adjusted direct costs, respectively, compared with normal weight, mainly driven by a steeply increased comorbidity in the higher BMI groups. In all BMI groups combined, individuals with ≥2 MetCs comprised 39% of the total study population and 60% of the total costs.
Conclusion: To manage the cost burden of obesity, treatment should be given equal consideration as other chronic diseases, and BMIs ≥30.0 kg/m2 should be considered in treatment decisions.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：