Displaying all 2 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Gargano LP, Zuppo IF, do Nascimento MMG, Augusto VM, Godman B, Costa JO, et al.
    Front Big Data, 2021;4:788268.
    PMID: 35198972 DOI: 10.3389/fdata.2021.788268
    BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has an appreciable socioeconomical impact in low- and middle-income countries, but most epidemiological data originate from high-income countries. For this reason, it is especially important to understand survival and factors associated with survival in COPD patients in these countries.

    OBJECTIVE: To assess survival of COPD patients in Brazil, to identify risk factors associated with overall survival, including treatment options funded by the Brazilian National Health System (SUS).

    METHODOLOGY: We built a retrospective cohort study of patients dispensed COPD treatment in SUS, from 2003 to 2015 using a National Database created from the record linkage of administrative databases. We further matched patients 1:1 based on sex, age and year of entry to assess the effect of the medicines on patient survival. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to estimate overall survival of patients, and Cox's model of proportional risks to assess risk factors.

    RESULT: Thirty seven thousand and nine hundred and thirty eight patients were included. Patient's survival rates at 1 and 10 years were 97.6% (CI 95% 97.4-97.8) and 83.1% (CI 95% 81.9-84.3), respectively. The multivariate analysis showed that male patients, over 65 years old and underweight had an increased risk of death. Therapeutic regimens containing a bronchodilator in a free dose along with a fixed-dose combination of corticosteroid and bronchodilator seem to be a protective factor when compared to other regimens.

    CONCLUSION: Our findings contribute to the knowledge of COPD patients' profile, survival rate and related risk factors, providing new evidence that supports the debate about pharmacological therapy and healthcare of these patients.

  2. Godman B, McCabe H, D Leong T, Mueller D, Martin AP, Hoxha I, et al.
    PMID: 32237953 DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2020.1734456
    Introduction: There are positive aspects regarding the prescribing of fixed dose combinations (FDCs) versus prescribing the medicines separately. However, these have to be balanced against concerns including increased costs and their irrationality in some cases. Consequently, there is a need to review their value among lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) which have the greatest prevalence of both infectious and noninfectious diseases and issues of affordability.Areas covered: Review of potential advantages, disadvantages, cost-effectiveness, and availability of FDCs in high priority disease areas in LMICs and possible initiatives to enhance the prescribing of valued FDCs and limit their use where there are concerns with their value.Expert commentary: FDCs are valued across LMICs. Advantages include potentially improved response rates, reduced adverse reactions, increased adherence rates, and reduced costs. Concerns include increased chances of drug:drug interactions, reduced effectiveness, potential for imprecise diagnoses and higher unjustified prices. Overall certain FDCs including those for malaria, tuberculosis, and hypertension are valued and listed in the country's essential medicine lists, with initiatives needed to enhance their prescribing where currently low prescribing rates. Proposed initiatives include robust clinical and economic data to address the current paucity of pharmacoeconomic data. Irrational FDCs persists in some countries which are being addressed.
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links