Search

Objectives: To determine whether (1) desirable health outcomes (e.g., symptom resolution) would be achieved with a new national drug-management program implemented by the Canadian Forces (CF); (2) CF members would be satisfied with the services offered by the civilian pharmacists; and (3) cost implications of the new program would be favorable.Design: Open, nonrandomized, longitudinal program evaluation and cost analysis study.Setting: Canada.Participants: 583 CF members who did not have access to a military pharmacy in selected geographic areas of Canada and 65 community pharmacy providers.Intervention: A new drug-management program, which allowed members to obtain nonprescription medications from civilian pharmacies without first obtaining a prescription from a physician at no additional cost, was evaluated in a pilot study.Main Outcome Measures: A cost-analysis model conducted from the CF Health Services and Department of National Defense perspectives and telephone survey assessing health outcomes and members' satisfaction with the program.Results: Based on 563 transactions that occurred during the pilot study period, 96% of the CF members reported being very to somewhat satisfied with the service received under the new drug-management program, and a majority stated that desirable health outcomes were achieved. The one area of concern cited about the new program was the low percentage of members who recalled being instructed by civilian pharmacists to see a physician if their symptoms did not abate. The cost analysis showed the new program was more economical than previous physician-based system.Conclusion: The provision of nonprescription medications by civilian pharmacists to members who had no access to a base pharmacy was both cost-efficient and associated with a high level of satisfaction. Future evaluations should include prospective monitoring of drug use patterns as well as assessments of the quality of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The majority of serious thromboembolic events occurring in assisted reproductive technologies (ART) are in women with ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).Objectives: The purpose of this study was to present a thorough review and cost analysis regarding the use of venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in OHSS to inform clinical management.Data Sources: Databases used were Pubmed and Embase, in addition to checking reference lists of retrieved articles (inception to November 2017).Methods: The systematic search strategy identified 365 titles and abstracts. Articles included in the qualitative synthesis had identified venous thrombosis incidence rates or ratios. A separate search for the cost model was conducted recognizing all associated complications of VTE. The decision tree was modeled to best fit the patient population and a sensitivity analysis was performed over a range of variables.Results: The cost of VTE event per OHSS patient not on prophylaxis was €5940 (range €3405 to €38,727), versus €4134 (€2705 to €23,192) per event per patient on prophylaxis, amounting to a saving of (€19 to €23,192) per VTE per patient. Sensitivity analysis found VTE prophyaxis to be cost effective if the incidence of VTE in the OHSS population was greater than 2.79%. Prophylactic therapy was cost effective through 16 weeks of treatment.Limitations: OHSS is infrequent and hence, the incidence of VTE in patients with OHSS is low; therefore, the data used to inform the incidence of VTE in OHSS in the model carry some uncertainty. Further, low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) has side effects therefore individualization of care must be considered.Conclusions: With the increasing incidence of infertility and requirement for ART, thromboembolism in OHSS poses a major health threat for patients. VTE prophylaxis using enoxaparin was cost effective in patients with severe OHSS over a wide range of costs and incidences. Prophylaxis was also cost effective through the completion of the first trimester of pregnancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare the cost of two treatment regimens for moderate to severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS): conservative inpatient versus outpatient management with paracentesis.Design: A decision-tree mathematical model comparing conservative inpatient versus outpatient management of moderate to severe OHSS was created. The common final pathway of either management was resolution of OHSS. Sensitivity analyses were performed over the range of variables.Main Outcome Measure(s): Total management cost of OHSS.Result(s): The cost of conservative therapy including first-tier complications was $10,099 (range $9,655-$15,044). The cost of outpatient management with paracentesis was $1954 (range $788-$12,041). This resulted in an estimated cost savings of $8145 with outpatient management with paracentesis. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed. Varying the probability of admission after outpatient treatment still indicated that outpatient treatment was the most cost-effective (probability = 1.0, cost = $6110). Varying the duration of hospitalization with primary inpatient treatment was equal to outpatient treatment costs only at a stay of 0.71 days or shorter.Conclusion(s): Our model suggests early outpatient paracentesis for moderate to severe OHSS is the most cost-effective management plan when compared with traditional conservative inpatient therapy. The cost savings for outpatient management persisted throughout a variety of outcome probabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]