Cost-effectiveness analysis of a multiple health behaviour change intervention in people aged between 45 and 75 years: a cluster randomized controlled trial in primary care (EIRA study)

Background: Multiple health behaviour change (MHBC) interventions that promote healthy lifestyles may be an efficient approach in the prevention or treatment of chronic diseases in primary care. This study aims to evaluate the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of the health promotion EIRA intervention in terms of MHBC and cardiovascular reduction. Methods: An economic evaluation alongside a 12-month cluster-randomised (1:1) controlled trial conducted between 2017 and 2018 in 25 primary healthcare centres from seven Spanish regions. The study took societal and healthcare provider perspectives. Patients included were between 45 and 75 years old and had any two of these three behaviours: smoking, insufficient physical activity or low adherence to Mediterranean dietary pattern. Intervention duration was 12 months and combined three action levels (individual, group and community). MHBC, defined as a change in at least two health risk behaviours, and cardiovascular risk (expressed in % points) were the outcomes used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated and used to calculate incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR). Missing data was imputed and bootstrapping with 1000 replications was used to handle uncertainty in the modelling results. Results: The study included 3062 participants. Intervention costs were €295 higher than usual care costs. Five per-cent additional patients in the intervention group did a MHBC compared to usual care patients. Differences in QALYS or cardiovascular risk between-group were close to 0 (- 0.01 and 0.04 respectively). The ICER was €5598 per extra health behaviour change in one patient and €6926 per one-point reduction in cardiovascular risk from a societal perspective. The cost-utility analysis showed that the intervention increased costs and has no effect, in terms of QALYs, compared to usual care from a societal perspective. Cost-utility planes showed high uncertainty surrounding the ICUR. Sensitivity analysis showed results in line with the main analysis. Conclusion: The efficiency of EIRA intervention cannot be fully established and its recommendation should be conditioned by results on medium-long term effects. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03136211. Registered 02 May 2017 – Retrospectively registered © 2021, The Author(s)

Pharmacotherapy negative outcomes resulting in Primary Care Emergency visits

Objetivo Analizar la prevalencia de los resultados negativos asociados a la medicación (RNM) que son causa de consulta en un servicio de urgencias de atención primaria (SUAP) en un entorno rural. Determinar la evitabilidad y la gravedad de los mismos. Diseño Estudio observacional descriptivo transversal. Emplazamiento SUAP de Mula. Murcia. Participantes Un total de 330 pacientes, en un periodo de 33 semanas. Mediciones principales Número y tipo de RNM: el farmacéutico, a través de los datos obtenidos de un cuestionario validado y la historia clínica, evaluó si existía relación entre los medicamentos que toma el paciente y el motivo de acudir a urgencias. En caso de sospecha de RNM se reevaluaba con el médico y se confirmaban o no los RNM identificados. Resultados De los 330 pacientes fueron evaluables 317. La media de edad de los pacientes era de 39,63 años y el 51,42% eran mujeres. La media de medicamentos que utilizaban fue de 1,38. Se detectaron un 26,50% (IC 95% 21,94-31,62) de pacientes con RNM como causa de visita a urgencias. El 53,57% de los RNM detectados fue de la categoría de efectividad y el 40,48% de necesidad. El 77,41% (IC-95% 67,35-85,01) de las visitas causadas por RNM fueron evitables. En cuanto a la gravedad, el 92,986% de los RNM eran leves. Conclusiones Una de cada 4 visitas al SUAP de Mula está causada por un RNM y, de ellas, el 77,41% son evitables.Objective Our aim was to estimate the prevalence of Pharmacotherapy negative outcomes in Primary Care Emergency visits in a rural environment, and to determine their preventability and severity. Design Descriptive study with an analytical component. Site Primary Care Emergency Service (SUAP), Mula. Murcia. Patients The study consisted of 330 patients over a 33 week period. Method Number and type of Pharmacotherapy negative outcomes: Pharmacist through the data, a validated questionnaire and medical history, assessing whether there was a relationship between the medications and the patient, and the reason for going to the Primary Care Emergency. In case of suspicion of Pharmacotherapy negative outcomes the patient is reassessed by the doctor, and the Pharmacotherapy negative outcomes confirmed or not identified. Results Of the 330 patients, 317 were evaluable. The mean age of patients was 39.63 years and 51.42% were women. The mean number of drugs used was 1.38, and 26.50% (95% CI, 21.94% -31.62%) patients were detected with Pharmacotherapy negative outcomes as a cause of visiting the Primary Care Emergency. 53.57% of the detected Pharmacotherapy negative outcomes detected as regards efficacy was 53.75%, 40.48% as regards need. More than three-quarters (77.41%; 95% CI, 67.35% -85.01%) of emergency visits caused by Pharmacotherapy negative outcomes were avoidable. In terms of severity, 92.86% of the Pharmacotherapy negative outcomes were mild. Conclusions One in four Mula SUAP visits are due to a Pharmacotherapy negative outcomes, and 77.41% of them are preventable

Cost-effectiveness analysis of nonoperative management versus open and laparoscopic surgery for uncomplicated acute appendicitis in Colombia

Abstract Background Traditionally, uncomplicated acute appendicitis (AA) has been treated with appendectomy. However, the surgical alternatives might carry out significant complications, impaired quality of life, and higher costs than nonoperative treatment. Consequently, it is necessary to evaluate the different therapeutic alternatives' cost-effectiveness in patients diagnosed with uncomplicated appendicitis. Methods We performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing nonoperative management (NOM) with open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in patients otherwise healthy adults aged 18–60 years with a diagnosis of uncomplicated AA from the payer´s perspective at the secondary and tertiary health care level. The time horizon was 5 years. A discount rate of 5% was applied to both costs and outcomes. The health outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were identified, quantified, and valorized from a payer perspective; therefore, only direct health costs were included. An incremental analysis was estimated to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In addition, the net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated for each alternative using a willingness to pay lower than one gross domestic product. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Methods We performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing nonoperative management (NOM) with open appendectomy (OA) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in patients otherwise healthy adults aged 18–60 years with a diagnosis of uncomplicated AA from the payer’s perspective at the secondary and tertiary health care level. The time horizon was five years. A discount rate of 5% was applied to both costs and outcomes. The health outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were identified, quantified, and valorized from a payer perspective; therefore, only direct health costs were included. An incremental analysis was estimated to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In addition, the net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated for each alternative using a willingness to pay lower than one gross domestic product. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Results LA presents a lower cost ($363 ± 35) than OA ($384 ± 41) and NOM ($392 ± 44). NOM exhibited higher QALYs (3.3332 ± 0.0276) in contrast with LA (3.3310 ± 0.057) and OA (3.3261 ± 0.0707). LA dominated the OA. The ICER between LA and NOM was$24,000/QALY. LA has a 52% probability of generating the highest NMB versus its counterparts, followed by NOM (30%) and OA (18%). There is a probability of 0.69 that laparoscopy generates more significant benefit than medical management. The mean value of that incremental NMB would be $93.7 per patient. Conclusions LA is a cost-effectiveness alternative in the management of patients with uncomplicated AA. Besides, LA has a high probability of producing more significant monetary benefits than NOM and OA from the payer’s perspective in the Colombian health system

Medication review of the polymedicated patient in primary care

En este trabajo se muestran los resultados de un estudio cuasi experimental sin grupo control realizado para identificar y resolver los resultados negativos asociados a la medicación en pacientes polimedicados de un cupo médico del Centro de Salud Salvador Caballero de Granada.Este trabajo ha recibido financiación de la Consejería de Salud de la Junta de Andalucía a través de convocatoria pública

Modeling the potential efficiency of a blood biomarker-based tool to guide pre-hospital thrombolytic therapy in stroke patients.

Abstract Objectives Stroke treatment with intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator (tPA) is efective and efcient, but as its benefts are highly time dependent, it is essential to treat the patient promptly after symptom onset. This study evaluates the cost-efectiveness of a blood biomarker test to diferentiate ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke to guide pre-hospital treatment with tPA in patients with suspected stroke, compared with standard hospital management. The standard care for patients sufering stroke consists mainly in diagnosis, treatment, hospitalization and monitoring. Methods A Markov model was built with four health states according to the modifed Rankin scale, in adult patients with suspected moderate to severe stroke (NIHSS 4-22) within 4.5 hours after symptom onset. A Spanish Health System perspective was used. The time horizon was 15 years. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and life-years gained (LYGs) were used as a measure of efectiveness. Short- and long-term direct health costs were included. Costs were expressed in Euros (2022). A discount rate of 3% was used. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis and several one-way sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results The use of a blood-test biomarker compared with standard care was associated with more QALYs (4.87 vs. 4.77), more LYGs (7.18 vs. 7.07), and greater costs (12,807¿ vs. 12,713¿). The ICER was 881¿/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the biomarker test was cost-efective in 82% of iterations using a threshold of 24,000¿/QALY. Conclusions The use of a blood biomarker test to guide pre-hospital thrombolysis is cost-efective compared with standard hospital care in patients with ischemic stroke

Pediatric Medication Noninitiation in Spain.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate medication noninitiation prevalence in the pediatric population and identify the explanatory factors underlying this behavior. METHODS: Observational study of patients (<18 years old) receiving at least 1 new prescription (28 pharmaceutical subgroups; July 2017 to June 2018) in Catalonia, Spain. A prescription was considered new when there was no prescription for the same pharmaceutical subgroup in the previous 6 months. Noninitiation occurred when a prescription was not filled within 1 month or 6 months (sensitivity analysis). Prevalence was estimated as the proportion of total prescriptions not initiated. To identify explanatory factors, a multivariable multilevel logistic regression model was used, and adjusted odds ratios were reported. RESULTS: Overall, 1 539 003 new prescriptions were issued to 715 895 children. The overall prevalence of 1-month noninitiation was 9.0% (ranging from 2.6% [oral antibiotics] to 21.5% [proton pump inhibitors]), and the prevalence of 6-month noninitiation was 8.5%. Noninitiation was higher in the youngest and oldest population groups, in children from families with a 0% copayment rate (vulnerable populations) and those with conditions from external causes. Out-of-pocket costs of drugs increased the odds of noninitiation. The odds of noninitiation were lower when the prescription was issued by a pediatrician (compared with a primary or secondary care clinician). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of noninitiation of medical treatments in pediatrics is high and varies according to patients' ages and medical groups. Results suggest that there are inequities in access to pharmacologic treatments in this population that must be taken into account by health care planners and providers