OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review is to critically evaluate how current literature has addressed WTP in relation to cancer treatment and achievement of outcomes.
METHODS: Seven databases were searched from inception until 2 March 2021 to include studies with primary data of WTP values for cancer treatments or achievement of outcomes that were elicited using stated preference methods.
RESULTS: Fifty-four studies were included in this review. All studies were published after year 2000 and more than 90% of the studies were conducted in high-income countries. Sample size of the studies ranged from 35 to 2040, with patient being the most studied population. There was a near even distribution between studies using contingent valuation and discrete choice experiment. Based on the included studies, the highest WTP values were for a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) ($11,498-$589,822), followed by 1-year survival ($3-$198,576), quality of life (QoL) improvement ($5531-$139,499), and pain reduction ($79-$94,662). Current empirical evidence suggested that improvement in QoL and pain reduction had comparable weights to survival in cancer management.
CONCLUSION: This systematic review provides a summary on stated preference studies that elicited patient preferences via WTP and summarised their respective values. Respondents in this review had comparable WTP for 1-year survival and QoL, suggesting that improvement in QoL should be emphasised together with survival in cancer management.
OBJECTIVES: The main aim of this pilot RCT is to determine the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of integrating CPs into the MDT for cancer pain management on the clinical outcomes of cancer patients experiencing pain.
METHODS: This study protocol outlines two-armed multicenter pilot RCT. Cancer patients suffering from pain will be randomly allocated to receive either clinical pharmacy services, i.e., PharmaCAP trial intervention from the CP, or the usual standard care (i.e., control group). Patients will be recruited consecutively from two hospitals in Kathmandu valley, Nepal. The outcomes will be assessed at baseline (pre-intervention) and 4 weeks post-intervention. The primary feasibility outcomes will include eligibility rate, recruitment rate, willingness to participate, acceptability of screening procedures and random allocation, possible contamination between the groups, intervention fidelity and compliance, treatment satisfaction, and patient understanding of the provided interventions. Subsequently, the primary clinical outcome, i.e., pain intensity of cancer patients, will be assessed. The secondary clinical outcomes will include health-related quality of life (HRQoL), anxiety, depression, adverse drug reactions, and patient medication compliance following the integration of CP into the healthcare team.
DISCUSSION: The feasibility and potential for integrating CP involvement in MDT to improve clinical outcomes of cancer patients with pain will be evaluated through the PharmaCAP trial.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05021393. Registered on 25th August 2022.
METHODS: A systematic search of English articles and gray literature, published from January 2010, was performed on databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, NHSEED, health technology assessment, Cochrane Library, etc. The included studies were EEs with DAMs that compared the costs and outcomes of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid-receptor agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. The study quality was evaluated using the Bias in Economic Evaluation (ECOBIAS) 2015 checklist and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklists.
RESULTS: A total of 59 EEs were included. Markov model, with a lifetime horizon and a monthly cycle length, was most commonly used in evaluating GDMTs for HFrEF. Most EEs conducted in the high-income countries demonstrated that novel GDMTs for HFrEF were cost-effective compared with the standard of care, with the standardized median incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $21 361/quality-adjusted life-year. The key factors influencing ICERs and study conclusions included model structures, input parameters, clinical heterogeneity, and country-specific willingness-to-pay threshold.
CONCLUSIONS: Novel GDMTs were cost-effective compared with the standard of care. Given the heterogeneity of the DAMs and ICERs, alongside variations in willingness-to-pay thresholds across countries, there is a need to conduct country-specific EEs, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, using model structures that are coherent with the local decision context.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted across six electronic databases, including Ovid Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, CENTRAL, APA PsycINFO, and DARE, from inception until June 2023. Prior to inclusion, two independent reviewers assessed study titles and abstracts. Following inclusion, an assessment of the methodological quality of the included studies was conducted. AMSTAR 2 was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the included SRs.
RESULTS: From 2055 retrieved titles, 11 systematic reviews were included, with 5 out of 11 being meta-analyses. These SRs encompassed diverse pharmacist-led interventions such as education, medication reviews, and multi-component strategies targeting various facets of pain management. These findings showed favorable clinical outcomes, including reduced pain intensity, improved medication management, enhanced overall physical and mental well-being, and reduced hospitalization durations. Significant pain intensity reductions were found due to pharmacists' interventions, with standardized mean differences (SMDs) ranging from -0.76 to -0.22 across different studies and subgroups. Physical functioning improvements were observed, with SMDs ranging from -0.38 to 1.03. Positive humanistic outcomes were also reported, such as increased healthcare provider confidence, patient satisfaction, and quality of life (QoL). QoL improvements were reported, with SMDs ranging from 0.29 to 1.03. Three systematic reviews examined pharmacist interventions' impact on pain-related economic outcomes, highlighting varying cost implications and the need for robust research methodologies to capture costs and benefits.
CONCLUSION: This umbrella review highlights the effectiveness of pharmacist-delivered interventions in improving clinical, humanistic, and economic outcomes related to pain management. Existing evidence emphasises on the need to integrate pharamacists into multi-disciplinary pain management teams. Further research is needed to investigate innovative care models, such as pharmacist-independent prescribing initiatives within collaborative pain management clinics.
METHODS: We surveyed HFrEF patients from two hospitals in Malaysia, using Malay, English or Chinese versions of EQ-5D-5L. EQ-5D-5L dimensional scores were converted to utility scores using the Malaysian value set. A confirmatory factor analysis longitudinal model was constructed. The utility and visual analog scale (VAS) scores were evaluated for validity (convergent, known-group, responsiveness), and measurement equivalence of the three language versions.
RESULTS: 200 HFrEF patients (mean age = 61 years), predominantly male (74%) of Malay ethnicity (55%), completed the admission and discharge EQ-5D-5L questionnaire in Malay (49%), English (26%) or Chinese (25%) languages. 173 patients (86.5%) were followed up at 1-month post-discharge (1MPD). The standardized factor loadings and average variance extracted were ≥ 0.5 while composite reliability was ≥ 0.7, suggesting convergent validity. Patients with older age and higher New York Heart Association (NYHA) class reported significantly lower utility and VAS scores. The change in utility and VAS scores between admission and discharge was large, while the change between discharge and 1MPD was minimal. The minimal clinically important difference for utility and VAS scores was ±0.19 and ±11.01, respectively. Malay and English questionnaire were equivalent while the equivalence of Malay and Chinese questionnaire was inconclusive.
LIMITATION: This study only sampled HFrEF patients from two teaching hospitals, thus limiting the generalizability of results to the entire heart failure population.
CONCLUSION: EQ-5D-5L is a valid questionnaire to measure health-related quality of life and estimate utility values among HFrEF patients in Malaysia. The Malay and English versions of EQ-5D-5L appear equivalent for clinical and economic assessments.
METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was developed to include 7 attributes valued in cancer management: physical, psychological and social functioning, pain control, survival, place of death, and cost. Patients were recruited via convenience sampling from 2 Malaysian public hospitals. The survey questionnaire was administered to patients within 6 months of their cancer diagnosis with a follow-up 3 months later. Conditional logit regression was used to estimate the preference weight, relative attribute importance, and willingness to pay.
RESULTS: One hundred valid responses were collected at baseline and 45 at follow-up. Respondents placed higher values on QoL improvements from severe to moderate or mild levels and to achieve home death over survival extension from 6 to 18 months. However, additional improvements (from moderate to mild) in some of the QoL outcomes were not valued as highly as life extension from 12 to 18 months, showing that it was vital for patients to avoid being in "severe" health dysfunction. Improving physical dysfunction from severe to mild yielded 3 times as much value as additional 1-year survival. After 3 months, the respondents' preferences changed significantly, with increased relative attribute importance of physical functioning, pain control, and cost.
CONCLUSIONS: As QoL outcomes are valued more than survival, palliative care should be introduced as early as possible to alleviate suffering related to advanced cancer.
METHODS: 200 patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) admitted into two hospitals in Malaysia due to worsening of HF were surveyed using the EQ-5D-5 L questionnaire. The primary outcomes were utility values at admission, discharge and 1-month post-discharge (1MPD). Secondary outcomes included the visual analogue scores (VAS) and the proportion of patients reporting each EQ-5D-5 L dimension levels. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation, and generalised linear mixed models were fitted.
RESULTS: At admission, the unadjusted mean utility values and VAS scores for HFrEF patients in Malaysia were as low as 0.150 ± 0.393 and 38.2 ± 20.8, respectively. After a median hospital stay of 4 days, there was a significant improvement in utility values and VAS scores by 0.510 (95% CI: 0.455-0.564) and 28.8 (95% CI: 25.5-32.1), respectively. The utility value and VAS score at 1-month post-discharge were not significantly different from discharge. The proportion of HFrEF patients reporting problems and severe problems in mobility, self-care, usual activities, and anxiety/depression, pain/discomfort reduced at varying degree from admission to discharge and 1MPD.
CONCLUSION: HF is a progressive condition with substantial variation in HRQoL during the disease trajectory. During hospitalisation due to worsening of HF, HFrEF population has unfavourable HRQoL. Rapid and significant HRQoL improvement was observed at discharge, which sustained over one month. The study findings can inform future cost-effectiveness analyses and policies.
METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using a prevalence-based approach from a societal perspective in Malaysia with a 1 year period from 2013. We used micro-costing technique with bottom-up method and included direct medical cost, direct non-medical cost, and indirect cost. The main data source was medical chart review which was conducted in Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL). The medical charts were identified electronically by matching the unique patient's identification number registered under the National Mental Health Schizophrenia Registry and the list of patients in HKL in 2013. Other data sources were government documents, literatures, and local websites. To ensure robustness of result, probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted.
RESULTS: The total estimated number of treated SCZ cases in Malaysia in 2015 was 15,104 with the total economic burden of USD 100 million (M) which was equivalent to 0.04% of the national gross domestic product. On average, the mean cost per patient was USD 6,594. Of the total economic burden of SCZ, 72% was attributed to indirect cost, costing at USD 72M, followed by direct medical cost (26%), costing at USD 26M, and direct non-medical cost (2%), costing at USD 1.7M.
CONCLUSION: This study highlights the magnitude of economic burden of SCZ and informs the policy-makers that there is an inadequate support for SCZ patients. More resources should be allocated to improve the condition of SCZ patients and to reduce the economic burden.
OBJECTIVE: To synthesize definitions of opioid stewardship proposed by clinical practice guidelines and professional societies, and to offer a proposal for a universally acceptable definition.
METHODS: Systematic literature searches were performed (earliest records to May 2022) in six databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, APA PsycINFO, Scopus, and CENTRAL) and grey sources guidelines development bodies and professional societies through Google. The conventional but widely applied content analysis and word frequencies were used to analyze the definitions and scope of practice.
RESULTS: After removing duplicates, 449 articles were retrieved (439 databases and registers and 11 from other sources), 19 of which included a definition of "opioids stewardship". A total of 12 themes was identified in the definitions, including 1) improvement or appropriateness of prescribing opioids use, 2) mitigation of risk from opioids, 3) monitoring opioid use, 4) evaluation of opioid use, 5) judicious opioid use, 6) appropriateness of opioid disposal, 7) identification and treatment of opioid use disorder, 8) reduction in mortality associated with opioid overdoses, 9) appropriate procurement practices, 10) appropriate storage, 11) promoting better communications between patients and prescribers including education provision and 12) patient-centered decision-making.
CONCLUSION: Opioid stewardship is inconsistently defined across professional and research literature. While there is a greater focus on appropriateness and need for improvement of prescribing and monitoring of opioid use, the importance of communications between patients and prescribers, and patient involvement in both prescribing and deprescribing decision-making remains sparse. A comprehensive definition has been proposed as part of the work. There is a need to develop and validate the proposed definition and scope of practice to promote rationale for opioid prescribing, use and attainment of favourable outcomes through international consensus involving practitioners, researchers, and patients.