scholarly journals An Occupational Therapy intervention for residents with stroke-related disabilities in UK Care Homes (OTCH): cluster randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (15) ◽  
pp. 1-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine M Sackley ◽  
Marion F Walker ◽  
Christopher R Burton ◽  
Caroline L Watkins ◽  
Jonathan Mant ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Occupational Therapy ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Functional Activity ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Care Home ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Care Homes

BackgroundCare home residents with stroke-related disabilities have significant activity limitations. Phase II trial results suggested a potential benefit of occupational therapy (OT) in maintaining residents’ capacity to engage in functional activity.ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a targeted course of OT in maintaining functional activity and reducing further health risks from inactivity for UK care home residents living with stroke-related disabilities.DesignPragmatic, parallel-group, cluster randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation. Cluster randomisation occurred at the care-home level. Homes were stratified according to trial administrative centre and type of care provided (nursing or residential), and they were randomised 1 : 1 to either the intervention or the control arm.SettingThe setting was 228 care homes which were local to 11 trial administrative centres across England and Wales.ParticipantsCare home residents with a history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack, including residents with communication and cognitive impairments, not receiving end-of-life care.InterventionPersonalised 3-month course of OT delivered by qualified therapists. Care workers participated in training workshops to support personal activities of daily living. The control condition consisted of usual care for residents.Main outcome measuresOutcome data were collected by a blinded assessor. The primary outcome at the participant level was the Barthel Index of Activities of Daily Living (BI) score at 3 months. The secondary outcomes included BI scores at 6 and 12 months post randomisation, and the Rivermead Mobility Index, Geriatric Depression Scale-15 and European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, three levels, questionnaire scores at all time points. Economic evaluation examined the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain. Costs were estimated from the perspective of the NHS and Personal Social Services.ResultsOverall, 568 residents from 114 care homes were allocated to the intervention arm and 474 residents from another 114 care homes were allocated to the control arm, giving a total of 1042 participants. Randomisation occurred between May 2010 and March 2012. The mean age of participants was 82.9 years, and 665 (64%) were female. No adverse events attributable to the intervention were recorded. Of the 1042 participants, 870 (83%) were included in the analysis of the primary outcome (intervention,n = 479; control,n = 391). The primary outcome showed no significant differences between groups. The adjusted mean difference in the BI score between groups was 0.19 points higher in the intervention arm [95% confidence interval (CI) –0.33 to 0.70,p = 0.48; adjusted intracluster correlation coefficient 0.09]. Secondary outcome measures showed no significant differences at all time points. Mean incremental cost of the Occupational Therapy intervention for residents with stroke living in UK Care Homes intervention was £438.78 (95% CI –£3360.89 to £1238.46) and the incremental QALY gain was 0.009 (95% CI –0.030 to 0.048).LimitationsA large proportion of participants with very severe activity-based limitations and cognitive impairment may have limited capacity to engage in therapy.ConclusionA 3-month individualised course of OT showed no benefit in maintaining functional activity in an older care home population with stroke-related disabilities.Future workThere is an urgent need to reduce health-related complications caused by inactivity and to provide an enabling built environment within care homes.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN00757750.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 15. See the Health Technology Assessment programme website for further project information.

scholarly journals Probiotics for Antibiotic-Associated Diarrhoea (PAAD): a prospective observational study of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (including Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhoea) in care homes

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (63) ◽  
pp. 1-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerenza Hood ◽  
Jacqui Nuttall ◽  
David Gillespie ◽  
Victoria Shepherd ◽  
Fiona Wood ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clostridium Difficile ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Care Home ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Care Homes ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Stage 1 ◽  
Antibiotic Associated Diarrhoea

BackgroundAntibiotic prescribing rates in care homes are higher than in the general population. Antibiotics disrupt the normal gut flora, sometimes causing antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD).Clostridium difficile(Hall and O’Toole 1935) Prévot 1938 is the most commonly identified cause of AAD. Little is known either about the frequency or type of antibiotics prescribed in care homes or about the incidence and aetiology of AAD in this setting.ObjectivesThe Probiotics for Antibiotic-Associated Diarrhoea (PAAD) study was designed as a two-stage study. PAAD stage 1 aimed to (1) prospectively describe antibiotic prescribing in care homes; (2) determine the incidence ofC. difficilecarriage and AAD (includingC. difficile-associated diarrhoea); and (3) to consider implementation challenges and establish the basis for a sample size estimation for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of probiotic administration with antibiotics to prevent AAD in care homes. If justified by PAAD stage 1, the RCT would be implemented in PAAD stage 2. However, as a result of new evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness of probiotics on the incidence of AAD, a decision was taken not to proceed with PAAD stage 2.DesignPAAD stage 1 was a prospective observational cohort study in care homes in South Wales with up to 12 months’ follow-up for each resident.SettingRecruited care homes had management and owner’s agreement to participate and three or more staff willing to take responsibility for implementing the study.ParticipantsEleven care homes were recruited, but one withdrew before any residents were recruited. A total of 279 care home residents were recruited to the observational study and 19 withdrew, 16 (84%) because of moving to a non-participating care home.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcomes were the rate of antibiotic prescribing, incidence of AAD, defined as three or more loose stools (type 5–7 on the Bristol Stool Chart) in a 24-hour period, andC. difficilecarriage confirmed on stool culture.ResultsStool samples were obtained at study entry from 81% of participating residents. Over half of the samples contained antibiotic-resistant isolates, with Enterobacteriaceae resistant to ciprofloxacin in 47%. Residents were prescribed an average of 2.16 antibiotic prescriptions per year [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.90 to 2.46]. Antibiotics were less likely to be prescribed to residents from dual-registered homes. The incidence of AAD was 0.57 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.81) episodes per year among those residents who were prescribed antibiotics. AAD was more likely in residents who were prescribed co-amoxiclav than other antibiotics and in those residents who routinely used incontinence pads. AAD was less common in residents from residential homes.ConclusionsCare home residents, particularly in nursing homes, are frequently prescribed antibiotics and often experience AAD. Antibiotic resistance, including ciprofloxacin resistance, is common in Enterobacteriaceae isolated from the stool of care home residents. Co-amoxiclav is associated with greater risk of AAD than other commonly prescribed antibiotics.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN 7954844.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 63. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Qualitative comparative analysis of health economic evaluation guidelines for health technology assessment in European countries

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Konstantinos Zisis ◽  
Panagiota Naoum ◽  
Kostas Athanasakis
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Content Analysis ◽  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Common Practices

Abstract Objective To classify, analyze, and compare published guidelines for economic evaluation within health technology assessment (HTA) in European countries and highlight differences and similarities. Methods We performed a literature review to identify published guidance for the conduct and assessment of economic evaluation studies that are undertaken within the context of HTA processes in European countries. Organizations and working groups were identified via the ISPOR, INAHTA, and EUnetHTA databases. Following the identification of official documents, we performed a qualitative content analysis to highlight discrepancies or common practices under the following categories: comparator, perspective on costs/benefits, time horizon, economic evaluation method, instrument used for utility measurement, outcome measure, source for efficacy, modeling, sensitivity analysis, discounting, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Results A total of nineteen guidance documents were identified (in English) providing data for the analysis in nineteen countries. The comparative content analysis identified common practices in most countries regarding the approaches to the choice of comparator, source of data, the preferred economic evaluation method, the option for a lifetime analytical horizon, discounting, and the choice of key outcome measure—for which, most countries recommend the use of the EQ-5D instrument. Differences were mainly found in the choice of perspective, dealing with uncertainty and sensitivity analysis, the use of end points, and the required use of modeling. Conclusions The use of economic evaluation constitutes one of the key pillars of the HTA process in Europe. Although a methodological convergence has occurred during the last few years, notable differences still remain.

HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT AND PERSONALIZED MEDICINE: ARE ECONOMIC EVALUATION GUIDELINES SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT DECISION MAKING?

2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Don Husereau ◽  
Deborah A. Marshall ◽  
Adrian R. Levy ◽  
Stuart Peacock ◽  
Jeffrey S. Hoch
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Personalized Medicine ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Population Based ◽  
New Paradigm ◽  
Current Guidance ◽  
Support Decision Making

Background: Many jurisdictions delivering health care, including Canada, have developed guidance for conducting economic evaluation, often in the service of larger health technology assessment (HTA) and reimbursement processes. Like any health intervention, personalized medical (PM) interventions have costs and consequences that must be considered by reimbursement authorities with limited resources. However, current approaches to economic evaluation to support decision making have been largely developed from population-based approaches to therapy—that is, evaluating the costs and consequences of single interventions across single populations. This raises the issue as to whether these methods, as they are or more refined, are adequate to address more targeted approaches to therapy, or whether a new paradigm for assessing value in PM is required.Objectives: We describe specific issues relevant to the economic evaluation of diagnostics-based PM and assess whether current guidance for economic evaluation is sufficient to support decision making for PM interventions.Methods: Issues were identified through literature review and informal interviews with national and international experts (n = 10) in these analyses. This article elaborates on findings and discussion at a workshop held in Ottawa, Canada, in January 2012.Results: Specific issues related to better guiding economic evaluation of personalized medicine interventions include: how study questions are developed, populations are characterized, comparators are defined, effectiveness is evaluated, outcomes are valued and how resources are measured. Diagnostics-based PM also highlights the need for analyses outside of economic evaluation to support decision making.Conclusions: The consensus of this group of experts is that the economic evaluation of diagnostics-based PM may not require a new paradigm. However, greater complexity means that existing approaches and tools may require improvement to undertake these more analyses.

scholarly journals Combining mirtazapine with SSRIs or SNRIs for treatment-resistant depression: the MIR RCT

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (63) ◽  
pp. 1-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Kessler ◽  
Alison Burns ◽  
Debbie Tallon ◽  
Glyn Lewis ◽  
Stephanie MacNeill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Reuptake Inhibitor ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Treatment Resistant Depression ◽  
Treatment Resistant ◽  
Resistant Depression

Background Depression is usually managed in primary care and antidepressants are often the first-line treatment, but only half of those treated respond to a single antidepressant. Objectives To investigate whether or not combining mirtazapine with serotonin–noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants results in better patient outcomes and more efficient NHS care than SNRI or SSRI therapy alone in treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Design The MIR trial was a two-parallel-group, multicentre, pragmatic, placebo-controlled randomised trial with allocation at the level of the individual. Setting Participants were recruited from primary care in Bristol, Exeter, Hull/York and Manchester/Keele. Participants Eligible participants were aged ≥ 18 years; were taking a SSRI or a SNRI antidepressant for at least 6 weeks at an adequate dose; scored ≥ 14 points on the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II); were adherent to medication; and met the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, criteria for depression. Interventions Participants were randomised using a computer-generated code to either oral mirtazapine or a matched placebo, starting at a dose of 15 mg daily for 2 weeks and increasing to 30 mg daily for up to 12 months, in addition to their usual antidepressant. Participants, their general practitioners (GPs) and the research team were blind to the allocation. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was depression symptoms at 12 weeks post randomisation compared with baseline, measured as a continuous variable using the BDI-II. Secondary outcomes (at 12, 24 and 52 weeks) included response, remission of depression, change in anxiety symptoms, adverse events (AEs), quality of life, adherence to medication, health and social care use and cost-effectiveness. Outcomes were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. A qualitative study explored patients’ views and experiences of managing depression and GPs’ views on prescribing a second antidepressant. Results There were 480 patients randomised to the trial (mirtazapine and usual care, n = 241; placebo and usual care, n = 239), of whom 431 patients (89.8%) were followed up at 12 weeks. BDI-II scores at 12 weeks were lower in the mirtazapine group than the placebo group after adjustment for baseline BDI-II score and minimisation and stratification variables [difference –1.83 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) –3.92 to 0.27 points; p = 0.087]. This was smaller than the minimum clinically important difference and the CI included the null. The difference became smaller at subsequent time points (24 weeks: –0.85 points, 95% CI –3.12 to 1.43 points; 12 months: 0.17 points, 95% CI –2.13 to 2.46 points). More participants in the mirtazapine group withdrew from the trial medication, citing mild AEs (46 vs. 9 participants). Conclusions This study did not find convincing evidence of a clinically important benefit for mirtazapine in addition to a SSRI or a SNRI antidepressant over placebo in primary care patients with TRD. There was no evidence that the addition of mirtazapine was a cost-effective use of NHS resources. GPs and patients were concerned about adding an additional antidepressant. Limitations Voluntary unblinding for participants after the primary outcome at 12 weeks made interpretation of longer-term outcomes more difficult. Future work Treatment-resistant depression remains an area of important, unmet need, with limited evidence of effective treatments. Promising interventions include augmentation with atypical antipsychotics and treatment using transcranial magnetic stimulation. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN06653773; EudraCT number 2012-000090-23. Funding This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 63. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT EVIDENCE ON E-HEALTH/M-HEALTH TECHNOLOGIES: EVALUATING THE TRANSPARENCY AND THOROUGHNESS

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladimir Vukovic ◽  
Carlo Favaretti ◽  
Walter Ricciardi ◽  
Chiara de Waure
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Healthcare Systems ◽  
Core Model ◽  
Social Aspects ◽  
European Network ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Research Questions

Objectives:Evaluation is crucial for integration of e-Health/m-Health into healthcare systems and health technology assessment (HTA) could offer sound methodological basis for these evaluations. Aim of this study was to look for HTA reports on e-Health/m-Health technologies and to analyze their transparency, consistency and thoroughness, with the goal to detect areas that need improvement.Methods:PubMed, ISI-WOS, and University of York – Centre for Reviews and Dissemination–electronic databases were searched to identify reports on e-Health/m-Health technologies, published up until April 1, 2016. The International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) checklist was used to evaluate transparency and consistency of included reports. Thoroughness was assessed by checking the presence of domains suggested by the European network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) HTA Core Model.Results:Twenty-eight reports published between 1999 and 2015 were included. Most were delivered by non-European countries (71.4 percent) and only 35.7 percent were classified as full reports. All the HTA reports defined the scope of research whereas more than 80 percent provided author details, summary, discussed findings, and conclusion. On the contrary, policy and research questions were clearly defined in around 30 percent and 50 percent of reports. With respect to the EUnetHTA Core Model, around 70 percent of reports dealt with effectiveness and economic evaluation, more than 50 percent described health problem and approximately 40 percent organizational and social aspects.Conclusions:E-Health/m-Health technologies are increasingly present in the field of HTA. Yet, our review identified several missing elements. Most of the reports failed to respond to relevant assessment components, especially ethical, social and organizational implications.

VP47 Health Technology Assessment Of Intensive Care Ventilators For Pediatric Patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 168-169
Author(s):  
Francesco Faggiano ◽  
Martina Andellini ◽  
Federico Nocchi ◽  
Carlo Capussotto ◽  
Francesca Sabusco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Context Analysis ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy

INTRODUCTION:The purpose of the study was to evaluate different type and manufacturers of intensive care ventilators in order to support the healthcare decision-making process about the choice to adopt the best available technology for ventilation of pediatric patient in intensive care units at Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital.METHODS:The technology assessment process was developed by using a new methodology, the Decision-oriented Health Technology Assessment (HTA) (DoHTA), a new implementation of the European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) CoreModel, integrating the Analytic Hierarchy Process (1). A literature review was carried out to gather evidence on safety and overall effectiveness of different kind of intensive care ventilators, with several ventilation modalities and strategies. The synthesis of scientific evidence, and results of the specific context analysis resulted in the definition of components of the decisional hierarchy structure, consisting in detailed characteristics of the technology's performances covering the aspects on feasibility, safety, efficacy, costs, and organizational and technical characteristics of the technology. A subgroup of these indicators has been included in a checklist form for the evaluation of different type and manufacturers of intensive care ventilators, each of which was tested in three independent runs performed in three different departments. In addition, an economic evaluation was also carried out.RESULTS:Preliminary DoHTA results showed that the domains with the highest impacts within the evaluation are safety and clinical effectiveness (34.8 percent and 25.7 percent, respectively) followed by organizational aspects, technical characteristics of technology and costs and economic evaluation. The final objective is to define the alternatives’ ranking through a comparison between alternative technologies’ performances.CONCLUSIONS:The technology assessment project allowed to identify strengths and limits of the most recent intensive care ventilator’ models in the specific contexts of use by involving all health professionals interested, and eventually identify the best option for the hospital.

The Alberta hip and knee replacement project: A model for health technology assessment based on comparative effectiveness of clinical pathways

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (02) ◽  
pp. 113-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine L. Gooch ◽  
Douglas Smith ◽  
Tracy Wasylak ◽  
Peter D. Faris ◽  
Deborah A. Marshall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Knee Replacement ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Comparative Effectiveness ◽  
Clinical Pathways ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Background:The Alberta Hip and Knee Replacement Project developed a new evidence-based clinical pathway (NCP) for total hip (THR) and knee (TKR) replacement. The aim was to facilitate the delivery of services in a timely and cost-effective manner while achieving the highest quality of care for the patient across the full continuum of care from patient referral to an orthopedic surgeon through surgery, recovery, and rehabilitation. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the study design, rationale, and execution of this project as a model for health technology assessment based on comparative effectiveness of alternative clinical pathways.Methods:A pragmatic randomized controlled trial study design was used to evaluate the NCP compared with the standard of care (SOC) for these procedures. The pragmatic study design was selected as a rigorous approach to produce high quality evidence suitable for informing decisions between relevant interventions in real clinical practice. The NCP was evaluated in three of the nine regional health authorities (RHAs) in Alberta with dedicated central intake clinics offering multidisciplinary care teams, constituting 80 percent of THR and TKR surgeries performed annually in Alberta. Patients were identified in the offices of twenty orthopedic surgeons who routinely performed THR or TKR surgeries. Evaluation outcome measures were based on the six dimensions of the Alberta Quality Matrix for Health (AQMH): acceptability, accessibility, appropriateness, effectiveness, efficiency and safety. Data were collected prospectively through patient self-completed questionnaires at baseline and 3 and 12 months after surgery, ambulatory and inpatient chart reviews, and electronic administrative data.Results:The trial design was successful in establishing similar groups for rigorous evaluation. Of the 4,985 patients invited to participate, 69 percent of patients consented. A total of 3,434 patients were randomized: 1,712 to SOC and 1,722 to the NCP. The baseline characteristics of patients in the two study arms, including demographics, comorbidity as measured by CDS and exposure to pain medications, and health-related quality of life, as measured by Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index and Short Form-36, were similar.Conclusions:The Alberta Hip and Knee Replacement Project demonstrates the feasibility and advantages of applying a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to ascertain comparative effectiveness. This is a model for health technology assessment that incorporates how clinical pathways can be effectively evaluated.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document