scholarly journals Adalimumab, etanercept and ustekinumab for treating plaque psoriasis in children and young people: systematic review and economic evaluation

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (64) ◽  
pp. 1-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Duarte ◽  
Teumzghi Mebrahtu ◽  
Pedro Saramago Goncalves ◽  
Melissa Harden ◽  
Ruth Murphy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Young People ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Children And Young People ◽  
Biological Treatments ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Cost

Background Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disease that predominantly affects the skin. Adalimumab (HUMIRA®, AbbVie, Maidenhead, UK), etanercept (Enbrel®, Pfizer, New York, NY, USA) and ustekinumab (STELARA®, Janssen Biotech, Inc., Titusville, NJ, USA) are the three biological treatments currently licensed for psoriasis in children. Objective To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adalimumab, etanercept and ustekinumab within their respective licensed indications for the treatment of plaque psoriasis in children and young people. Data sources Searches of the literature and regulatory sources, contact with European psoriasis registries, company submissions and clinical study reports from manufacturers, and previous National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) technology appraisal documentation. Review methods Included studies were summarised and subjected to detailed critical appraisal. A network meta-analysis incorporating adult data was developed to connect the effectiveness data in children and young people and populate a de novo decision-analytic model. The model estimated the cost-effectiveness of adalimumab, etanercept and ustekinumab compared with each other and with either methotrexate or best supportive care (BSC), depending on the position of the intervention in the management pathway. Results Of the 2386 non-duplicate records identified, nine studies (one randomised controlled trial for each drug plus six observational studies) were included in the review of clinical effectiveness and safety. Etanercept and ustekinumab resulted in significantly greater improvements in psoriasis symptoms than placebo at 12 weeks’ follow-up. The magnitude and persistence of the effects beyond 12 weeks is less certain. Adalimumab resulted in significantly greater improvements in psoriasis symptoms than methotrexate for some but not all measures at 16 weeks. Quality-of-life benefits were inconsistent across different measures. There was limited evidence of excess short-term adverse events; however, the possibility of rare events cannot be excluded. The majority of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the use of biologics in children and young people exceeded NICE’s usual threshold for cost-effectiveness and were reduced significantly only when combined assumptions that align with those made in the management of psoriasis in adults were adopted. Limitations The clinical evidence base for short- and long-term outcomes was limited in terms of total participant numbers, length of follow-up and the absence of young children. Conclusions The paucity of clinical and economic evidence to inform the cost-effectiveness of biological treatments in children and young people imposed a number of strong assumptions and uncertainties. Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) gains associated with treatment and the number of hospitalisations in children and young people are areas of considerable uncertainty. The findings suggest that biological treatments may not be cost-effective for the management of psoriasis in children and young people at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, unless a number of strong assumptions about HRQoL and the costs of BSC are combined. Registry data on biological treatments would help determine safety, patterns of treatment switching, impact on comorbidities and long-term withdrawal rates. Further research is also needed into the resource use and costs associated with BSC. Adequately powered randomised controlled trials (including comparisons against placebo) could substantially reduce the uncertainty surrounding the effectiveness of biological treatments in biologic-experienced populations of children and young people, particularly in younger children. Such trials should establish the impact of biological therapies on HRQoL in this population, ideally by collecting direct estimates of EuroQol-5 Dimensions for Youth (EQ-5D-Y) utilities. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016039494. Funding The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

scholarly journals Multisystemic therapy compared with management as usual for adolescents at risk of offending: the START II RCT

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (23) ◽  
pp. 1-114
Author(s):  
Peter Fonagy ◽  
Stephen Butler ◽  
David Cottrell ◽  
Stephen Scott ◽  
Stephen Pilling ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Young People ◽  
Multisystemic Therapy ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Second Phase ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Start Trial ◽  
The Cost

Background The Systemic Therapy for At Risk Teens (START) trial is a randomised controlled trial of multisystemic therapy (MST) compared with management as usual (MAU). The present study reports on long-term follow-up of the trial (to 60 months). Objectives The primary objective was to compare MST and MAU for the proportion of young people in each group with criminal convictions up to 60 months post baseline. Secondary outcomes included group comparisons of psychological and behavioural factors. An economic analysis was carried out to determine the cost-effectiveness of MST compared with MAU. Two qualitative studies were conducted to better understand the subjective experiences of the participants. Design Primary outcomes (collected up to 60 months) were collected using a centralised police database. Secondary outcomes were evaluated using self-report questionnaires completed by both young people and parents or carers at the 24-, 36- and 48-month follow-ups. Research assistants were blind to treatment allocation. Setting Participants were recruited from participating MST sites in nine areas of England. Secondary outcomes were typically collected within the family home. Participants A total of 684 families were recruited into the START trial and allocated randomly to a treatment group. Of these, 487 remained in the second phase of the trial. Young people were aged, on average, 13.8 years at baseline, with 63% male and 37% female. Interventions MST is a manualised programme for young people exhibiting antisocial behaviour and their families that uses principles from cognitive–behavioural and family therapy to provide an individualised approach. MAU content was not prespecified, but consisted of the standard care offered to young people who met eligibility for the trial. Main outcome measures Young people’s offending was evaluated using the Police National Computer. Secondary measures included validated self-report measures completed by both the young person and their parent or carer. The economic evaluation took a broad perspective and outcomes were assessed in terms of quality-adjusted life-years and offending. Results No significant differences were found in the proportion of offending between the groups (hazard ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval 0.84 to 1.26; p = 0.78). No differences were found between the groups on secondary outcome measures, with a few exceptions that did not hold up consistently across the follow-up period. The economic analysis did not find evidence to support the cost-effectiveness of MST compared with MAU. Outcomes from the qualitative studies suggest that families mostly felt positive about MST, and that MST was associated with greater maturity in young men. Limitations Some intended evaluations were not possible to deliver. Selective attrition may have influenced the nature of the sample size. It is also unclear how representative the MAU services were of reality. Future research Recommendations are made for the evaluation of MST in populations with more severe behavioural problems, as well as for identifying and testing new moderators. Conclusions The results of the second phase of the START trial do not support the long-term superiority of MST to MAU, but elements of the intervention may be adapted successfully. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN77132214 and London South-East REC registration number 09/H1102/55. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 23. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

scholarly journals Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical options for the management of anterior and/or posterior vaginal wall prolapse: two randomised controlled trials within a comprehensive cohort study – results from the PROSPECT Study

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (95) ◽  
pp. 1-452 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cathryn Glazener ◽  
Suzanne Breeman ◽  
Andrew Elders ◽  
Christine Hemming ◽  
Kevin Cooper ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Prolapse Surgery ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Biological Graft ◽  
Randomised Controlled

BackgroundThe use of mesh in prolapse surgery is controversial, leading to a number of enquiries into its safety and efficacy.ObjectiveTo compare synthetic non-absorbable mesh inlay, biological graft and mesh kit with a standard repair in terms of clinical effectiveness, adverse effects, quality of life (QoL), costs and cost-effectiveness.DesignTwo randomised controlled trials within a comprehensive cohort (CC) study. Allocation was by a remote web-based randomisation system in a 1 :1 : 1 ratio (Primary trial) or 1 : 1 : 2 ratio (Secondary trial), and was minimised on age, type of prolapse repair planned, need for a concomitant continence procedure, need for a concomitant upper vaginal prolapse procedure and surgeon. Participants and outcome assessors were blinded to randomisation; participants were unblinded if they requested the information. Surgeons were not blinded to allocated procedure.SettingThirty-five UK hospitals.ParticipantsPrimary study: 2474 women in the analysis (including 1348 randomised) having primary anterior or posterior prolapse surgery.Secondary study: 398 in the analysis (including 154 randomised) having repeat anterior or posterior prolapse surgery.CC3: 215 women having either uterine or vault prolapse repair.InterventionsAnterior or posterior repair alone, or with mesh inlay, biological graft or mesh kit.Main outcome measuresProlapse symptoms [Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score (POP-SS)]; prolapse-specific QoL; cost-effectiveness [incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY)].ResultsPrimary trials: adjusting for baseline and minimisation covariates, mean POP-SS was similar for each comparison {standard 5.4 [standard deviation (SD) 5.5] vs. mesh 5.5 (SD 5.1), mean difference (MD) 0.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) –0.70 to 0.71; standard 5.5 (SD 5.6) vs. graft 5.6 (SD 5.6), MD –0.15, 95% CI –0.93 to 0.63}. Serious non-mesh adverse effects rates were similar between the groups in year 1 [standard 7.2% vs. mesh 7.8%, risk ratio (RR) 1.08, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.72; standard 6.3% vs. graft 9.8%, RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.59]. There were no statistically significant differences between groups in any other outcome measure. The cumulative mesh complication rates over 2 years were 2 of 430 (0.5%) for standard repair (trial 1), 46 of 435 (10.6%) for mesh inlay and 2 of 368 (0.5%) for biological graft. The CC findings were comparable. Incremental costs were £363 (95% CI –£32 to £758) and £565 (95% CI £180 to £950) for mesh and graft vs. standard, respectively. Incremental QALYs were 0.071 (95% CI –0.004 to 0.145) and 0.039 (95% CI –0.041 to 0.120) for mesh and graft vs. standard, respectively. A Markov decision model extrapolating trial results over 5 years showed standard repair had the highest probability of cost-effectiveness, but results were surrounded by considerable uncertainty.Secondary trials: there were no statistically significant differences between the randomised groups in any outcome measure, but the sample size was too small to be conclusive. The cumulative mesh complication rates over 2 years were 7 of 52 (13.5%) for mesh inlay and 4 of 46 (8.7%) for mesh kit, with no mesh exposures for standard repair.ConclusionsIn women who were having primary repairs, there was evidence of no benefit from the use of mesh inlay or biological graft compared with standard repair in terms of efficacy, QoL or adverse effects (other than mesh complications) in the short term. The Secondary trials were too small to provide conclusive results.LimitationsWomen in the Primary trials included some with a previous repair in another compartment. Follow-up is vital to identify any long-term potential benefits and serious adverse effects.Future workLong-term follow-up to at least 6 years after surgery is ongoing to identify recurrence rates, need for further prolapse surgery, adverse effects and cost-effectiveness.TriaI registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN60695184.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. 20, No. 95. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of point-of-care viscoelastic haemostatic assays in the management of bleeding during cardiac surgery: protocol for a prospective multicentre pragmatic study with stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled design and 1-year follow-up (the IMOTEC study)

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e029751 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Christophe Rigal ◽  
Elodie Boissier ◽  
Karim Lakhal ◽  
Valéry-Pierre Riche ◽  
Isabelle Durand-Zaleski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Stepped Wedge ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Cost

IntroductionDuring cardiac surgery-associated bleeding, the early detection of coagulopathy is crucial. However, owing to time constraints or lack of suitable laboratory tests, transfusion of haemostatic products is often inappropriately triggered, either too late (exposing to prolonged bleeding and thus to avoidable administration of blood products) or blindly to the coagulation status (exposing to unnecessary haemostatic products administration in patients with no coagulopathy). Undue exposition to transfusion risks and additional healthcare costs may arise. With the perspective of secondary care-related costs, the IMOTEC study (Intérêt MédicO-économique de la Thrombo-Elastographie, dans le management transfusionnel des hémorragies péri-opératoires de chirurgies Cardiaques sous circulation extracorporelle) aims at assessing the cost-effectiveness of a point-of-care viscoelastic haemostatic assay (VHA: RoTem or TEG)-guided management of bleeding. Among several outcome measures, particular emphasis will be put on quality of life with a 1-year follow-up.Methods and analysisThis is a multicentre, prospective, pragmatic study with stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled design. Over a 36-month period (24 months of enrolment and 12 months of follow-up), 1000 adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass will be included if a periprocedural significant bleeding occurs. The primary outcome is the cost-effectiveness of a VHA-guided algorithm over a 1-year follow-up, including patients’ quality of life. Secondary outcomes are the cost-effectiveness of the VHA-guided algorithm with regard to the rate of surgical reexploration and 1-year mortality, its cost per-patient, its effectiveness with regard to haemorrhagic, infectious, renal, neurological, cardiac, circulatory, thrombotic, embolic complications, transfusion requirements, mechanical ventilation free-days, duration of intensive care unit and in-hospital stay and mortality.Ethics and disseminationThe study was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov and was approved by the Committee for the Protection of Persons of Nantes University Hospital, The French Advisory Board on Medical Research Data Processing and the French Personal Data Protection Authority. A publication of the results in a peer-reviewed journal is planned.Trial registration numberNCT02972684; Pre-results.

Co-Design and Open Trial of Starship Rescue, a Cognitive Behavior Therapy, Biofeedback, and Game-Based eHealth Intervention to Treat Anxiety in Children and Young People with Long-Term Physical Conditions (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiran Thabrew ◽  
Karolina Stasiak ◽  
Harshali Kumar ◽  
Tarique Naseem ◽  
Christopher Frampton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Young People ◽  
Preliminary Evidence ◽  
Children And Young People ◽  
Physical Conditions ◽  
System Usability Scale ◽  
Ehealth Intervention

BACKGROUND Approximately 10% to 12% of New Zealand children and young people have long-term physical conditions (also known as chronic illnesses) and are more likely to develop psychological problems, particularly anxiety and depression. Delayed treatment leads to worse physical and mental healthcare, school absence, and poorer long-term outcomes. Recently, electronic health (eHealth) interventions, especially those based on the principles of Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT), have been shown to be as good as face-to-face therapy. Biofeedback techniques have also been shown to enhance relaxation during the treatment of anxiety. However, these modalities have rarely been combined. Young people with long-term physical conditions have expressed a preference for well-designed and technologically-based support to deal with psychological issues, especially anxiety. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to co-design and evaluate the (i) acceptability and (ii) usability of a CBT and biofeedback-based, 5-module eHealth game called ‘Starship Rescue’ and (iii) to provide preliminary evidence regarding its effectiveness in addressing anxiety and quality of life in young people with long-term physical conditions. METHODS Starship Rescue was co-designed with children and young people from a tertiary hospital in Auckland, New Zealand. Following this, 24 young people aged 10 to 17 years were enrolled in an open trial, during which they were asked to use the game for an 8-week period. Acceptability of the game to all participants was assessed using a brief, open-ended questionnaire, and more detailed feedback was obtained from a subset of 10 participants via semi-structured interviews. Usability was evaluated via the System Usability Scale (SUS) and device-recorded frequency and duration of access on completion of the game. Anxiety levels were measured prior to commencement, on completion of the game, and 3 months later using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale (GAD-7) and Spence Child Anxiety Scales (SCAS), and at the start of each module and at the end of the game using an embedded Likert/visual analog scale. Quality of life was measured prior to commencement and on completion of the game using the Pediatric Quality of Life Scale (PEDS-QL). RESULTS Users gave Starship Rescue an overall rating of 5.9 out of 10 (range 3-10 and a mean score of 71 out of 100 (SD 11.7; min 47.5; max 90) on the System Usability Scale (SUS). The mean time period for use of the game was just over 11-weeks (78.8 days, 13.5 hours, 40 minutes). Significant reductions in anxiety were noted between the start and end of the game on the GAD-7 (-4.6 (p=0.000)), SCAS (-9.6 (p=0.005)), and the Likert/visual analogue scales (-2.4 (p=0.001)). Quality of life also improved on the PedsQL scale (+4.3 (p=0.042)). All changes were sustained at 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS This study provides preliminary evidence for Starship Rescue being an acceptable, usable and effective eHealth intervention for addressing anxiety in young people with long-term physical conditions. Further evaluation is planned via a more formal randomized controlled trial. CLINICALTRIAL Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Network Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12616001253493p;https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=371443 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6sYB716lf)

scholarly journals M.I.C.E—Mental Health Intervention for Children with Epilepsy: a randomised controlled, multi-centre clinical trial evaluating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of MATCH-ADTC in addition to usual care compared to usual care alone for children and young people with common mental health disorders and epilepsy—study protocol

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie D. Bennett ◽  
◽  
J. Helen Cross ◽  
Anna E. Coughtrey ◽  
Isobel Heyman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Young People ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Psychological Intervention ◽  
Mental Health Disorders ◽  
Long Term Conditions ◽  
Children And Young People ◽  
Health Disorders ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Mental health disorders in the context of long-term conditions in children and young people are currently overlooked and undertreated. Evidence-based psychological treatments for common childhood mental health disorders (anxiety, depression and disruptive behaviour disorders) have not been systematically evaluated in young people with epilepsy despite their high prevalence in this population. The aim of this multi-site randomised controlled trial is to determine the clinical and cost-effectiveness of adding a modular psychological intervention to usual care for the mental health disorders in comparison to assessment-enhanced usual care alone. Methods In total, 334 participants aged 3–18 years attending epilepsy services will be screened for mental health disorders with the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) and the diagnostic Development and Wellbeing Assessment (DAWBA). Those identified as having a mental health disorder and consenting to the trial will be randomised to either receive up to 22 sessions of the modular psychological intervention (MATCH-ADTC) delivered over the telephone over 6 months by non-mental health professionals in addition to usual care or to assessment-enhanced usual care alone. Outcomes will be measured at baseline, 6 months and 12 months post-randomisation. It is hypothesised that MATCH-ADTC plus usual care will be superior to assessment-enhanced usual care in improving emotional and behavioural symptoms. The primary outcome is the SDQ reported by parents at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include parent-reported mental health measures such as the Revised Children’s Anxiety and Depression Scale, quality of life measures such as the Paediatric Quality of Life Inventory and physical health measures such as the Hague Seizure Severity Scale. Outcome assessors will be blinded to group assignment. Qualitative process evaluations and a health economic evaluation will also be completed. Discussion This trial aims to determine whether a systematic and integrated approach to the identification and treatment of mental health disorders in children and young people with epilepsy is clinically and cost-effective. The findings will contribute to policies and practice with regard to addressing mental health needs in children and young people with other long-term conditions. Trial registration ISRCTN ISRCTN57823197. Registered on 25 February 2019.

scholarly journals Optimising medication management in children and young people with ADHD using a computerised test (QbTest): a feasibility randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Williams ◽  
Charlotte L. Hall ◽  
Sue Brown ◽  
Boliang Guo ◽  
Marilyn James ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Young People ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Medication Management ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Global Functioning ◽  
Children And Young People ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Medication for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) should be closely monitored to ensure optimisation. There is growing interest in using computerised assessments of ADHD symptoms to support medication monitoring. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the efficacy of one such computerised assessment, the Quantified Behavior (Qb) Test, as part of medication management for ADHD. Methods This feasibility multi-site RCT conducted in child and adolescent mental health and community paediatric settings recruited participants aged 6–15 years diagnosed with ADHD starting stimulant medication. Participants were randomised into one of two arms: experimental (QbTest protocol) where participants completed a QbTest at baseline and two follow-up QbTests on medication (2–4 weeks and 8–10 weeks later) and control where participants received treatment as usual, including at least two follow-up consultations. Measures of parent, teacher, and clinician-rated symptoms and global functioning were completed at each time point. Clinicians recorded treatment decision-making and health economic measures were obtained. Data were analysed using multi-level modelling and participants (children and parents) and clinicians were interviewed about their experiences, resulting data were thematically analysed. Results Forty-four children and young people were randomised. Completion of study outcome measures by care-givers and teachers ranged from 52 to 78% at baseline to 47–65% at follow-up. Participants reported the questionnaires to be useful to complete. SNAP-IV inattention scores showed greater reduction in the intervention than the control group (− 5.85, 95% CI − 10.33, − 1.36,). Engagement with the intervention ranged from 100% at baseline, to 78% follow-up 1 and 57% follow-up 2. However, only 37% of QbTests were conducted in the correct time period. Interview data highlighted that the objectivity of the QbTest was appreciated by clinicians and parents. Clinicians commented that the additional time and resources required meant that it is not feasible to use QbTest for all cases. Conclusion The trial design and protocol appear to be feasible and acceptable but could be improved by modifying QbTest time periods and the method of data collection. With these changes, the protocol may be appropriate for a full trial. Adding QbTest may improve symptom outcome as measured by SNAP-IV. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03368573, prospectively registered, 11th December 2017, and ISRCTN, ISRCTN69461593, retrospectively registered, 10th April 2018

scholarly journals ImmunoCAP® ISAC and Microtest for multiplex allergen testing in people with difficult to manage allergic disease: a systematic review and cost analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (67) ◽  
pp. 1-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Westwood ◽  
Bram Ramaekers ◽  
Shona Lang ◽  
Nigel Armstrong ◽  
Caro Noake ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Conference Proceedings ◽  
Citation Index ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Cost Analyses ◽  
Immunocap Isac

BackgroundAllergy is a form of immune-mediated exaggerated sensitivity (hypersensitivity) to a substance that is either inhaled, swallowed, injected or comes into contact with the skin. Foreign substances that provoke allergies are called allergens. It has been claimed that multiplex allergen testing may help in diagnosing the cause of symptoms in patients with an unclear cause of allergy or who are allergic to more than one substance.ObjectivesTo evaluate multiplex allergen testing [devices that can measure the presence of multiple immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibodies in a patient’s blood at the same time], by assessing (1) clinical effectiveness (allergy symptoms, incidence of acute exacerbations, mortality, adverse events of testing and treatment, health-care presentations or admissions, health-related quality of life); (2) effects on treatment (diet, immunotherapy medications, other potential testing); (3) any additional diagnostic information provided by multiplex allergen testing; and (4) cost-effectiveness (cost of different assessment strategies).MethodsFifteen databases were searched from 2005 to April 2015, including MEDLINE (via OvidSp), MEDLINE In-Process Citations, MEDLINE Daily Update, PubMed (National Library of Medicine), EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database, Science Citation Index (SCI), Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S), BIOSIS Previews, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) HTA programme, and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA); supplementary searches of conference proceedings and trials registries were performed. Review methods followed published guidance from the Cochrane Collaboration and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, UK. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using appropriate published tools or a review-specific tool designed by the project team. Studies were summarised in a narrative synthesis. Owing to a lack of data on the clinical effectiveness of multiplex allergen testing, no long-term cost-effectiveness model was developed. A conceptual model structure was developed and cost analyses were performed to examine the short-term costs of various possible diagnostic pathways.ResultsFifteen studies were included in the review. The very limited available data indicated that the addition of multiplex allergen testing [ImmunoCAP®Immuno Solid-phase Allergen Chip (ISAC), Thermo Fisher Scientific/Phadia AB, Uppsala, Sweden] to standard diagnostic work-up can change the clinicians’ views on the diagnosis, management and treatment of patients. There was some indication that the use of ImmunoCAP ISAC testing may be useful to guide decisions on the discontinuation of restrictive diets, the content of allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT) prescriptions, and whether or not patients should receive SIT. However, none of the studies that we identified reported any information on clinical outcomes subsequent to changes in treatment or management. There was some evidence that ImmunoCAP ISAC may be useful for discriminating allergens that are structurally similar and are recognised by the same IgE antibody (cross-immunoreactive). No data were available for Microtest (Microtest Matrices Ltd, London, UK). Detailed cost analyses suggested that multiplex allergen testing would have to result in a substantial reduction of the proportions of patients receiving single IgE testing and oral food challenge tests in order to be cost-saving in the short term.ConclusionsNo recommendations for service provision can be made based on the analyses included in this report. It is suggested that a consensus-based protocol for the use of multiplex allergen testing be developed. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the proposed protocol should then be assessed by comparing long-term clinical and quality of life outcomes and resource use in patients managed using the protocol with those managed using a standard diagnostic pathway.Study registrationThis study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015019739.FundingThis project was a Diagnostic Assessment Report commissioned by the NIHR HTA programme on behalf of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

Custo-efetividade da telemedicina no acompanhamento de asmáticos: revisão sistemática

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcela Da Silva Souza ◽  
Carolina Barbosa Souza Santos ◽  
Raimeyre Marques Torres ◽  
Mayara Sousa Silva ◽  
Ana Carla Carvalho Coelho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Asthma Management ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Made In

Aim: systematic review of the literature on the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine in the follow-up of asthmatics. Method: Systematic review of the PUBMED / MEDLINE, LILACS and Cochrane Central databases. Articles published in English, Portuguese or Spanish were considered in the period from 2005 to 2018 according to the PRISMA guidelines. Results: A total of 1363 articles were identified, of which 59 were read in their entirety. Only five met the eligibility criteria, and all were made in European countries and totaled 2,497 participants. The interventions were performed by nurses (4 of 5 studies), remaining from 16 weeks to 12 months. Telemedicine costs were similar or slightly lower compared to usual treatments. Telemedicine had a beneficial effect on asthma control (1 of 5 studies), quality of life (3 out of 5 studies) and hospitalizations (1 of 5 studies). Conclusion: Telemedicine slightly reduces costs with asthma management and may have an impact on morbidity indicators

scholarly journals Optimising medication management in children and young people with ADHD using a computerised test (QbTest): a feasibility randomised controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Williams ◽  
Charlotte L Hall ◽  
Sue Brown ◽  
Boliang Guo ◽  
Marilyn James ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Young People ◽  
Stimulant Medication ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Medication Management ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Global Functioning ◽  
Children And Young People ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background: Medication for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) should be closely monitored to ensure optimisation. There is growing interest in using computerised assessments of ADHD symptoms to support medication monitoring. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the efficacy of one such computerised assessment, the Quantified Behavior (Qb) Test, as part of medication management for ADHD.Methods: This feasibility multi-site RCT conducted in child and adolescent mental health and community paediatric settings recruited participants aged 6-15 years diagnosed with ADHD starting stimulant medication. Participants were randomised into one of two arms: Experimental (QbTest protocol); participants completed a QbTest at baseline and two follow-up QbTests on medication (2-4 weeks and 8-10 weeks later). Control; participants received treatment-as-usual, including at least two follow-up consultations. Measures of parent, teacher and clinician-rated symptoms and global functioning were completed at each time-point. Clinicians recorded treatment decision-making and health economic measures were obtained. Data were analysed using multi-level modelling and participants (children and parents) and clinicians were interviewed about their experiences, resulting data were thematically analysed.Results: Forty-four children and young people were randomised. Completion of study outcome measures by care-givers and teachers ranged from 52-78% at baseline to 47-65% at follow-up. Participants reported the questionnaires to be useful to complete. SNAP-IV inattention scores showed greater reduction in the intervention than the control group (-5.85, 95%CI -10.33, -1.36, p=0.01). Engagement with the intervention ranged from 100% at baseline, to 78% follow-up 1 and 57% follow-up 2. However, only 37% of QbTests were conducted in the correct time period. Interview data highlighted that the objectivity of the QbTest was appreciated by clinicians and parents. Clinicians commented that the additional time and resources required meant that it is not feasible to use QbTest for all cases.Conclusion: The trial design and protocol appear to be feasible and acceptable, but could be improved by modifying QbTest time periods and the method of data collection. With these changes the protocol may be appropriate for a full trial. Adding QbTest may improve symptom outcome as measured by SNAP-IV.Trial registration: Prospectively registered with Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03368573, 11th December 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03368573) and retrospectively with ISRCTN (ISRCTN69461593, 10th April 2018, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN69461593).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document