Time filter

Source Type

Sutherland C.S.,Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute | Sutherland C.S.,University of Basel | Yukich J.,Tulane University | Goeree R.,Programs for Assessment of Technology in Health PATH Research institute | And 4 more authors.
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases | Year: 2015

Human African trypanosomiasis (HAT) is a disease caused by infection with the parasite Trypanosoma brucei gambiense or T. b. rhodesiense. It is transmitted to humans via the tsetse fly. Approximately 70 million people worldwide were at risk of infection in 1995, and approximately 20,000 people across Africa are infected with HAT. The objective of this review was to identify existing economic evaluations in order to summarise cost-effective interventions to reduce, control, or eliminate the burden of HAT. The studies included in the review were compared and critically appraised in order to determine if there were existing standardised methods that could be used for economic evaluation of HAT interventions or if innovative methodological approaches are warranted. A search strategy was developed using keywords and was implemented in January 2014 in several databases. The search returned a total of 2,283 articles. After two levels of screening, a total of seven economic evaluations were included and underwent critical appraisal using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) Methodology Checklist 6: Economic Evaluations. Results from the existing studies focused on the cost-effectiveness of interventions for the control and reduction of disease transmission. Modelling was a common method to forecast long-term results, and publications focused on interventions by category, such as case detection, diagnostics, drug treatments, and vector control. Most interventions were considered cost-effective based on the thresholds described; however, the current treatment, nifurtomix-eflornithine combination therapy (NECT), has not been evaluated for cost-effectiveness, and considerations for cost-effective strategies for elimination have yet to be completed. Overall, the current evidence highlights the main components that play a role in control; however, economic evaluations of HAT elimination strategies are needed to assist national decision makers, stakeholders, and key funders. These analyses would be of use, as HAT is currently being prioritized as a neglected tropical disease (NTD) to reach elimination by 2020. © 2015 Sutherland et al. Source

To identify patient management patterns in patients with solid tumors and metastatic bone disease who are receiving intravenous (IV) bisphosphonates (zoledronic acid and pamidronate), and to estimate the time and health care resources used for preparation and administration of zoledronic acid and pamidronate in patients with metastatic bone disease in Canada. A modified 2-round Delphi technique was used, which was composed of 7 clinical experts. The first round was performed through telephone interviews with individual clinical experts to assess the management of patients with bone metastases receiving IV zoledronic acid and pamidronate. The interviews focused on qualitative issues, such as drugs administered, cancers identified, and the method of drug administration. The information obtained from the first round was used to describe typical patient management patterns. The information obtained from the second round was done by a face-to-face meeting involving all expert members, with the aim of confirming the management patterns, and identifying commonality and uniqueness across institutions. The time and health care resources needed for preparation and administration of the IV bisphosphonates were estimated. The expert panel comprised 4 pharmacists and 3 nurses from 2 centers in Ontario and 3 centers in Quebec. The main stages identified, which were associated with the preparation and administration of pamidronate and zoledronic acid, included preinfusion activities, IV access set-up, IV bisphosphonate preparation, chemotherapy infusion (if applicable), IV bisphosphonate infusion, and postinfusion activities. Five patient management patterns were identified and varied with respect to inclusion of chemotherapy and the use of ambulatory infusion devices. Without chemotherapy, the mean time for preparation and administration of zoledronic acid ranged from 38 minutes in a community service center to 85 minutes in a hospital-based cancer center. With chemotherapy, the total mean time increased to 119 minutes for patients with prostate cancer and 173 minutes for patients with breast cancer. The mean time for preparation and administration of pamidronate was 159 minutes with the use of a regular infusion device, and the time in the clinic was only 14 minutes with the use of an ambulatory infusion device. If chemotherapy was scheduled on the same visits, the mean time increased substantially, and varied depending on the type of cancer being treated. Preparation and administration of IV bisphosphonates are associated with notable burden to health care providers and patients, even if the waiting time, including preinfusion (eg, IV access set-up, serum creatinine level monitoring) and postinfusion activities, were excluded. Variations in the time and health care resources utilized for preparing and administering IV bisphosphonates were observed across the centers in Canada. The variation could be primarily due to the difference in patient management patterns. Source

Bowen J.M.,Programs for Assessment of Technology in Health PATH Research institute
Ontario health technology assessment series | Year: 2012

In August 2011 a proposed epilepsy care model was presented to the Ontario Health Technology Advisory Committee (OHTAC) by an Expert Panel on a Provincial Strategy for Epilepsy Care in Ontario. The Expert Panel recommended leveraging existing infrastructure in the province to provide enhanced capacity for epilepsy care. The point of entry for epilepsy care and the diagnostic evaluation for surgery candidacy and the epilepsy surgery would occur at regional and district epilepsy centres in London, Hamilton, Toronto, and Ottawa and at new centres recommended for northern and eastern Ontario. This economic analysis report was requested by OHTAC to provide information about the estimated budgetary impact on the Ontario health care system of increasing access to epilepsy surgery and to examine the cost-effectiveness of epilepsy surgery in both children and adults. A prevalence-based "top-down" health care system budgetary impact model from the perspective of the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care was developed to estimate the potential costs associated with expanding health care services to increase access to epilepsy care in general and epilepsy surgery in particular. A 5-year period (i.e., 2012-2016) was used to project annual costs associated with incremental epilepsy care services. Ontario Health Survey estimates of epilepsy prevalence, published epilepsy incidence data, and Canadian Census results for Ontario were used to approximate the number of individuals with epilepsy in the province. Applying these population estimates to data obtained from a recent field evaluation study that examined patterns of care and costs associated with epilepsy surgery in children, a health care system budget impact was calculated and the total costs and incremental costs associated with increasing access to surgery was estimated. In order to examine the cost-effectiveness of epilepsy surgery in children, a decision analysis compared epilepsy surgery to continued medical management in children with medically intractable epilepsy. Data from the field evaluation were combined with various published data to estimate the costs and outcomes for children with drug-refractory epilepsy over a 20-year period. Outcomes were defined as the number of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) accumulated over 20 years following epilepsy surgery. There are about 20,981 individuals with medically intractable epilepsy in Ontario. Of these, 9,619 (1,441 children and 8,178 adults) could potentially be further assessed at regional epilepsy centres for suitability for epilepsy surgery, following initial evaluation at a district epilepsy care centre. The health care system impact analysis related to increasing access to epilepsy surgery in the Ontario through the addition of epilepsy monitoring unit (EMU) beds with video electroencephalography (vEEG) monitoring (total capacity of 15 pediatric EMU beds and 35 adult EMU beds distributed across the province) and the associated clinical resources is estimated to require an incremental $18.1 million (Cdn) annually over the next 5 years from 2012 to 2016. This would allow for about 675 children and 1050 adults to be evaluated each year for suitability for epilepsy surgery representing a 150% increase in pediatric epilepsy surgery evaluation and a 170% increase in adult epilepsy surgery evaluation. Epilepsy surgery was found to be cost-effective compared to continued medical management in children with drug-refractory epilepsy with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $25,020 (Cdn) to $69,451 (Cdn) per QALY for 2 of the scenarios examined. In the case of choosing epilepsy surgery versus continued medical management in children known to be suitable for surgery, the epilepsy surgery was found to be less costly and provided greater clinical benefit, that is, it was the dominant strategy. Epilepsy surgery for medically intractable epilepsy in suitable candidates has consistently been found to provide favourable clinical outcomes and has been demonstrated to be cost-effective in both adult and child patient populations. The first step to increasing access to epilepsy surgery is to provide access to evidence-based care for all patients with epilepsy, both adults and children, through the provision of resources to expand EMU bed capacity and associated clinical personnel across the province of Ontario. Source

Manca A.,University of York | Sculpher M.J.,University of York | Goeree R.,McMaster University | Goeree R.,Programs for Assessment of Technology in Health PATH Research institute
PharmacoEconomics | Year: 2010

Evidence produced by multinational trial-based cost-effectiveness studies is often used to inform decisions concerning the adoption of new healthcare technologies. A key issue relating to the use of this type of evidence is the extent to which trial-wide economic results are applicable to every single country participating in the study. We consider what role cost-effectiveness analysis alongside multinational trials should have in assisting reimbursement decisions at jurisdiction and national levels. Using the proposed framework as a benchmark to evaluate their relative pros and cons, we then describe and review the statistical approaches used in the multinational trial-based cost-effectiveness literature. The results of the review are used to define the desirable characteristics a statistical method for the analysis of data collected from different jurisdictions should have in order to be consistent with the proposed framework.It is argued that Bayesian hierarchical models that use both patient- and country-level information are the most appropriate tool to analyse multinational trial-based cost-effectiveness data and facilitate the between-country generalizability assessment of the study findings. The merits of each approach are discussed, highlighting problems and limitations, in order to identify areas of future research. © 2010 Adis Data Information BV. All rights reserved. Source

Diaby V.,Programs for Assessment of Technology in Health PATH Research institute | Diaby V.,McMaster University | Diaby V.,Florida A&M University | Goeree R.,Programs for Assessment of Technology in Health PATH Research institute
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research | Year: 2014

In recent years, the quest for more comprehensiveness, structure and transparency in reimbursement decision-making in healthcare has prompted the research into alternative decision-making frameworks. In this environment, multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is arising as a valuable tool to support healthcare decision-making. In this paper, we present the main MCDA decision support methods (elementary methods, value-based measurement models, goal programming models and outranking models) using a case study approach. For each family of methods, an example of how an MCDA model would operate in a real decision-making context is presented from a critical perspective, highlighting the parameters setting, the selection of the appropriate evaluation model as well as the role of sensitivity and robustness analyses. This study aims to provide a step-by-step guide on how to use MCDA methods for reimbursement decision-making in healthcare. © 2014 Informa UK, Ltd. Source

Discover hidden collaborations