scholarly journals THU0626 Cost-effectiveness of early treatment of acpa positive rheumatoid arthritis patients with abatacept

Author(s):  
AS Neubauer ◽  
C Minartz ◽  
KH Herrmann ◽  
R Postema ◽  
C Baerwald
2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (8) ◽  
pp. 2086-2095 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dipen Patel ◽  
Ahmed Shelbaya ◽  
Raymond Cheung ◽  
Jyoti Aggarwal ◽  
Sang Hee Park ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 896-906 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Rosenheck ◽  
Douglas Leslie ◽  
Kyaw Sint ◽  
Haiqun Lin ◽  
Delbert G. Robinson ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Hammond ◽  
Yeliz Prior ◽  
Sarah Cotterill ◽  
Chris Sutton ◽  
Elizabeth Camacho ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Arthritis (or compression) gloves are widely prescribed to people with rheumatoid arthritis and other forms of hand arthritis. They are prescribed for daytime wear to reduce hand pain and improve hand function, and/or night-time wear to reduce pain, improve sleep and reduce morning stiffness. However, evidence for their effectiveness is limited. The aims of this study were to investigate the clinical and cost effectiveness of arthritis gloves compared to placebo gloves on hand pain, stiffness and function in people with rheumatoid arthritis and persistent hand pain. Methods A parallel randomised controlled trial, in adults (≥ 18 years) with rheumatoid or undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis at 16 National Health Service sites in the UK. Patients with persistent hand pain affecting function and/or sleep were eligible. Randomisation (1:1) was stratified by recent change (or not) in medication, using permuted blocks of random sizes. Three-quarter-finger length arthritis gloves (Isotoner®: applying 23-32 mmHg pressure) (intervention) were compared to loose-fitting placebo gloves (Jobskin® classic: providing no/minimal pressure) (control). Both gloves (considered to have similar thermal qualities) were provided by occupational therapists. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded; clinicians were not. The primary outcome was dominant hand pain on activity (0–10) at 12 weeks, analysed using linear regression and intention to treat principles. Results Two hundred six participants were randomly assigned (103 per arm) and 163 (84 intervention: 79 control) completed 12-week follow-up. Hand pain improved by 1.0 (intervention) and 1.2 (control), an adjusted mean difference of 0.10 (95% CI: − 0.47 to 0.67; p = 0.72). Adverse events were reported by 51% of intervention and 36% of control group participants; with 6 and 7% respectively, discontinuing glove wear. Provision of arthritis gloves cost £129, with no additional benefit. Conclusion The trial provides evidence of no clinically important effect of arthritis gloves on any of the trial outcomes (hand pain, function and stiffness) and arthritis gloves are not cost-effective. The clinical and cost-effectiveness results support ceasing provision of arthritis gloves in routine clinical practice. Funding: National Institute for Health Research. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN25892131; Registered 05/09/2016: retrospectively registered.


2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. A440
Author(s):  
A Beresniak ◽  
V Hamuryudan ◽  
M Inane ◽  
S Pay ◽  
H Yazici ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. S595
Author(s):  
X. Lu ◽  
M. Radford ◽  
M. Gharaibeh ◽  
P. Gabb ◽  
A. Hewins ◽  
...  

2000 ◽  
Vol 89 (S 01) ◽  
pp. S23-S26 ◽  
Author(s):  
R van Haselen

AbstractObjective: The practical implementation of a staged, multifaceted research agenda for the economic evaluation of complementary medicine (CM) at the Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital (RLHH).Method: The relative importance of economic evaluation as an evidence base of CM was assessed via a survey conducted with purchasers (n=481). The marginal costs of providing complementary care for patients with rheumatoid arthritis were calculated. The use, and changes in the use, of conventional medicines for patients’ main complaints were established retrospectively (n=499) and prospectively (n=70). Health-related quality of life (patient utility) of newly referred patients was assessed with the EQ-5D (EuroQol) instrument (n=70) on a 100 mm (0=worst, 100=best) scale.Results: Economic evaluation was rated ‘important’ as an evidence base, after safety and RCT data (‘very important’). Consultation time (doctors and dietician) contributed 29% of the total costs of treating rheumatoid arthritis. The retrospective survey showed that many patients on conventional medication were able to stop (29%) or reduce (32%) intake in the course of treatment. The median (quartiles) health state of newly referred patients was 70 mm (50,78) in men and 60 mm (36,73) in women. Some results of an interim analysis of 6 months follow-up data are reported.Conclusions: Economic evaluation of CM is becoming increasingly important and should take place by using a multifaceted, staged approach. Before embarking on randomised trials, observational data on cost, effectiveness and utility should be collected. The cost-effectiveness of CM appears to be most sensitive to the duration of the consultation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document