Costs of alternative forms of NHS care for mentally handicapped persons

The main purpose of this paper is to measure the costs of small (i.e. less than 50 beds) NHS units for the care of mentally handicapped persons in the community and to compare these costs with those of hospital care standardising wherever possible for resident characteristics such as age and dependency. Other factors apart from size which are associated with variations in costs are also examined. Accordingly, this paper sets out the results of three main costing exercises: 1. The ward costs of the Royal Albert Hospital, Lancaster 2. The costs of small NHS units i n the South Western, Trent and West Midlands RHAs 3. An estimate of the cost consequences of transferring residents from hospital to community care in NHS units. Although capital costs are deliberately excluded from the analysis, the hospital and the small unit costs include the costs of Education and Social Services as well as NHS costs. The major factors associated with the variations in costs between wards in the hospital and between NHS units in the community were, so far as above average costs were concerned, the age of residents (usually care of the youngest or oldest patients,) dependency characteristics (proportion of residents physically handicapped and/or behaviourally disordered), low capacity usage and uncertainty about the future use. The main factor associated with lower than average costs was resource deployment which appeared to be low compared with the apparent demands for care. The resource consequences of shifting care from hospital to NHS based community units were divided between short-term and long-term effects. The short-term effects were based on resources which would be released if one ward closed and the long term effects were based on the closure of all wards. With several reservations the short term cost increases of this shift in the balance of care within the NHS was estimated at around 98% of existing hospital ward costs for the care of children and 75% for the care of adults. The longer term cost differences estimated at 28% for childrens' units and 22% for adult units.mental health, mentally handicapped

Addressing challenges for sustainable healthcare in Central and Eastern Europe

All European countries face increasing challenges in the provision of equitable and comprehensive healthcare for their citizens in view of a number of factors including changing demographics and the launch of new premium priced medicines. The challenges are even more difficult among Central and Eastern European healthcare systems. Consequently, there is a need for countries to learn from each other to help address some of these challenges and to maintain sustainable systems. This was the basis of the 2-day conference, The Fifth International Conference: Challenges for Efficient Healthcare in Central and Eastern Europe, 9-10 October 2015, Belgrade, Serbia

Enhancing the rational use of new medicines across European health care systems

n/

Utilization and Expenditure of Anti-cancer Medicines in Kosovo: Findings and Implications.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE:The Ministry of Health (MoH) leads and organizes health policy in Kosovo, which includes procurement and provision of medicines, including anti-cancer medicines, which compose a special group of medicines. However, there has been limited analysis of the utilization and expenditure on anti-cancer medicines in Kosovo; consequently, the objective of this study is to undertake research to provide future guidance on the use of anti-cancer medicines. METHOD:National drug utilization data is available in Kosovo. Utilization and expenditure on anti-cancer medicines [Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) code L], initially from 2011 to 2013, especially for anti-cancer medicines on the essential medicines list was analysed from national data. In addition, current systems for procuring and managing anti-cancer medicines in Kosovo was documented. RESULTS:There was appreciable variability in the utilization of anti-cancer medicines over the years, with low or limited use of some anti-cancer medicines on the Essential Medicine List. This is a concern in view of their essential medicine status. From 2011 to 2013, €16.49 million was spent on anti-cancer medicines (ATC L). The process of selection of new medicines begins with suggestions from doctors at the University Clinical Centre in Kosovo. CONCLUSION:The analysis has shown appreciable variation with current utilization patterns for anti-cancer medicines in Kosovo. This needs to be addressed as part of improving the drug management process to optimize patient care within available resources. Future years and reforms need to be assessed to improve current utilization and expenditure patterns

Commentary: Comparison of historical medical spending patterns among the BRICS and G7

A commentary on Comparison of historical medical spending patterns among the BRICS and G7 by Jakovljevic, M. M. (2015)

Foley catheterisation versus oral misoprostol for induction of labour in hypertensive women in India (INFORM): a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial

Background Between 62 000 and 77 000 women die annually from pre-eclampsia and eclampsia. Prompt delivery, preferably by the vaginal route, is vital for good maternal and neonatal outcomes. Two low-cost interventions—low-dose oral misoprostol tablets and transcervical Foley catheterisation—are already used in low-resource settings. We aimed to compare the relative risks and benefits of these interventions. Methods We undertook this multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial in two public hospitals in Nagpur, India. Women (aged ≥18 years) who were at 20 weeks' gestation or later with a live fetus and required delivery as a result of pre-eclampsia or hypertension were randomly assigned (1:1), via computer-generated block randomisation (block sizes of four, six, and eight) with concealment by use of opaque, sequentially numbered, sealed envelopes, to receive labour induction with either oral misoprostol 25 μg every 2 h (maximum of 12 doses) or a transcervical Foley catheter (silicone, size 18 F with 30 mL balloon). Randomisation was stratified by study centre. The catheter remained in place until active labour started, the catheter fell out, or 12 h had elapsed. If the catheter did not fall out within 12 h, induction continued with artificial membrane rupture and oxytocin, administered through a micro-drip gravity infusion set. Fetal monitoring was by intermittent auscultation. The primary outcome was vaginal birth within 24 h. Due to the nature of the interventions, masking of participants, study investigators, and care providers to group allocation was not possible. We analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01801410. Findings Between Dec 20, 2013, and June 29, 2015, we randomly assigned 602 women to induction with misoprostol (n=302) or the Foley catheter (n=300; intention-to-treat population). Vaginal birth within 24 h was more common in women in the misoprostol group than in the Foley catheter group (172 [57·0%] vs 141 [47·0%] women; absolute risk difference 10·0%, 95% CI 2·0–17·9; p=0·0136). Rates of uterine hyperstimulation were low in both the misoprostol and Foley catheter groups (two [0·7%] vs one [0·3%] cases; absolute risk difference 0·3%, 95% CI −0·8 to 1·5; p=0·566) and neonatal deaths did not differ significantly between groups (six [2·0%] vs three [1·0%] neonatal deaths; 1·0, −1·04 to 2·97; p=0·322). 17 serious adverse events (3%) were reported during the study: one case of intrapartum convulsion and one case of disseminated intravascular coagulation (both in the Foley group); ten perinatal deaths, including two stillbirths (both in the Foley catheter group) and eight neonatal deaths (n=5 in the misoprostol group and n=3 in the Foley catheter group); and five of neonatal morbidity, comprising birth asphyxia (n=3), septicaemia (n=1), and neonatal convulsion (n=1). Interpretation Oral misoprostol was more effective than transcervical Foley catheterisation for induction of labour in women with pre-eclampsia or hypertension. Future studies are required to assess whether oxytocin augmentation following misoprostol can be replaced by regular doses of oral misoprostol tablets

The Induction with Foley OR Misoprostol (INFORM) Study dataset. A dataset of 602 women with hypertensive disease in pregnancy, in India, randomised to either Foley catheter or oral misoprostol for induction of labour

Objectives: Induction of labour (IOL), or starting labour artificially, can be a lifesaving intervention for pregnant women and their babies, and rates are rising significantly globally. As rates increase, it becomes increasingly important to fully evaluate all available data, especially that from low income settings where the potential benefits and harms are greater. The goal of this paper is to describe the datasets collected as part of the Induction with Foley OR Misoprostol (INFORM) Study, a randomised trial comparing two of the recommended methods of cervical ripening for labour induction, oral misoprostol and Foley catheter, in women being induced for hypertension in pregnancy, at two sites in India during 2013-15. Data description: This dataset includes comprehensive data on 602 women who underwent IOL for hypertensive disorders in pregnancy. Women were randomly assigned to cervical ripening with oral misoprostol or a transcervical Foley catheter in two government hospitals in India. The main dataset has 367 variables including monitoring during the induction of labour, medications administered, timing and mode of delivery, measures of neonatal morbidity and mortality, maternal mortality and morbidity, maternal satisfaction and health economic data. The dataset is anonymised and available on ReShare

The Implementation of Managed Entry Agreements in Central and Eastern Europe : Findings and Implications

Funding Information: In Bosnia and Herzegovina, both The Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republic of Srpska, also have special funds and budgets in place for the financing of expensive medicines, which are innovative and under patent. Similar earmarked funds are available in Scotland (the New Medicines Fund funded by the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme [PPRS] rebates) [35] and England (the Cancer Drugs Fund) [36]. However, support for such earmarked funds is mixed. While they facilitate access, critics raised issues about fairness towards other disease areas and patient groups that are not eligible for special funding [3, 39]. Further, the views of a Patient and Clinician Engagement meeting in Scotland [37] and the end-of-life criteria in England [38] offer opportunities for special considerations affecting medicines for end-of-life and very rare conditions to be taken into account in the health technology assessment process. Funding Information: The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. Jan Jones from the Scottish Medicines Consortium, Scotland, for contributing to the discussion with information on Scotland, Drs. Lyudmila Bezmelnitsyna and Anastasia Isaeva for contributing to data collection in Russia and Dr. Kate?ina Podrazilov? from SZP ?R for providing information on the Czech Republic. Alessandra Ferrario was a Research Officer at the LSE Health at the time this research was conducted. She is now a postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, USA. Email: [email protected] No sources of funding were used for this study. The authors declare they have no conflicts of interest. However, Di?na Ar?ja, Maria Dimitrova, Jurij F?rst, Ieva Grei?i?t?-Kuprijanov, Iris Hoxha, Arianit Jakupi, Erki Laidm?e, Vanda Markovic-Pekovic, Dmitry Meshkov, Guenka Petrova, Maciej Pomorski and Patricia Vella Bonanno work directly for national health authorities or are advisers to them. Alessandra Ferrario, Tomasz Bochenek, Ileana Mardare, Dominik Tomek, Luka Voncina, Alan Haycox, Panos Kanavos,?Olga L?blov?, and Brian Godman are academics and independent researchers also working with national and regional health authorities and others to improve the quality and efficiency of prescribing, and Tarik Catic, D?vid Dank?,and Tanja Novakovic are involved with pharmaceutical, pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research groups in their countries. Olga L?blov? has also carried out remunerated consultancy activities for A&R Partners, Baxter AG and Instytut Arcana and Ileana Mardare has signed a consulting contract with Ewopharma A.G. Romania. The content of the paper and the conclusions are those of each author and may not necessarily reflect those of any organisation that employs them. Publisher Copyright: © 2017, The Author(s).Background: Managed entry agreements (MEAs) are a set of instruments to facilitate access to new medicines. This study surveyed the implementation of MEAs in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) where limited comparative information is currently available. Method: We conducted a survey on the implementation of MEAs in CEE between January and March 2017. Results: Sixteen countries participated in this study. Across five countries with available data on the number of different MEA instruments implemented, the most common MEAs implemented were confidential discounts (n = 495, 73%), followed by paybacks (n = 92, 14%), price-volume agreements (n = 37, 5%), free doses (n = 25, 4%), bundle and other agreements (n = 19, 3%), and payment by result (n = 10, >1%). Across seven countries with data on MEAs by therapeutic group, the highest number of brand names associated with one or more MEA instruments belonged to the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC)-L group, antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents (n = 201, 31%). The second most frequent therapeutic group for MEA implementation was ATC-A, alimentary tract and metabolism (n = 87, 13%), followed by medicines for neurological conditions (n = 83, 13%). Conclusions: Experience in implementing MEAs varied substantially across the region and there is considerable scope for greater transparency, sharing experiences and mutual learning. European citizens, authorities and industry should ask themselves whether, within publicly funded health systems, confidential discounts can still be tolerated, particularly when it is not clear which country and party they are really benefiting. Furthermore, if MEAs are to improve access, countries should establish clear objectives for their implementation and a monitoring framework to measure their performance, as well as the burden of implementation.publishersversionPeer reviewe