Cost-effectiveness of HBV and HCV screening strategies:a systematic review of existing modelling techniques

Introduction: Studies evaluating the cost-effectiveness of screening for Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) and Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) are generally heterogeneous in terms of risk groups, settings, screening intervention, outcomes and the economic modelling framework. It is therefore difficult to compare cost-effectiveness results between studies. This systematic review aims to summarise and critically assess existing economic models for HBV and HCV in order to identify the main methodological differences in modelling approaches. Methods: A structured search strategy was developed and a systematic review carried out. A critical assessment of the decision-analytic models was carried out according to the guidelines and framework developed for assessment of decision-analytic models in Health Technology Assessment of health care interventions. Results: The overall approach to analysing the cost-effectiveness of screening strategies was found to be broadly consistent for HBV and HCV. However, modelling parameters and related structure differed between models, producing different results. More recent publications performed better against a performance matrix, evaluating model components and methodology. Conclusion: When assessing screening strategies for HBV and HCV infection, the focus should be on more recent studies, which applied the latest treatment regimes, test methods and had better and more complete data on which to base their models. In addition to parameter selection and associated assumptions, careful consideration of dynamic versus static modelling is recommended. Future research may want to focus on these methodological issues. In addition, the ability to evaluate screening strategies for multiple infectious diseases, (HCV and HIV at the same time) might prove important for decision makers

Dental management considerations for the patient with an acquired coagulopathy. Part 1: Coagulopathies from systemic disease

Current teaching suggests that many patients are at risk for prolonged bleeding during and following invasive dental procedures, due to an acquired coagulopathy from systemic disease and/or from medications. However, treatment standards for these patients often are the result of long-standing dogma with little or no scientific basis. The medical history is critical for the identification of patients potentially at risk for prolonged bleeding from dental treatment. Some time-honoured laboratory tests have little or no use in community dental practice. Loss of functioning hepatic, renal, or bone marrow tissue predisposes to acquired coagulopathies through different mechanisms, but the relationship to oral haemostasis is poorly understood. Given the lack of established, science-based standards, proper dental management requires an understanding of certain principles of pathophysiology for these medical conditions and a few standard laboratory tests. Making changes in anticoagulant drug regimens are often unwarranted and/or expensive, and can put patients at far greater risk for morbidity and mortality than the unlikely outcome of postoperative bleeding. It should be recognised that prolonged bleeding is a rare event following invasive dental procedures, and therefore the vast majority of patients with suspected acquired coagulopathies are best managed in the community practice setting