Search

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a secondary prevention programme in patients admitted to the emergency department due to drug-related problems (DRPs)., Methods: A decision model compared costs and outcomes of patients with DRPs admitted to the emergency department. Model variables and costs, along with their distributions, were obtained from the trial results and literature. The study was performed from the perspective of the National Health System including only direct costs., Key Findings: The implementation of a secondary prevention programme for DRPs reduces costs associated with emergency department revisits, with an annual net benefit of €87 639. Considering a mortality rate attributable to readmission of 4.7%, the cost per life-years gained (LYG) with the implementation of this programme was €2205. In the short term, the reduction in the number of revisits following the programme implementation was the variable that most affected the model, with the benefit threshold value corresponding to a relative reduction of 12.4% of the number of revisits of patients with DRPs to obtain benefits., Conclusions: Implementing a secondary prevention programme is cost-effective for patients with DRPs admitted to the emergency department. Implementation costs will be exceeded by reducing revisits to the emergency department., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Nowadays, it is difficult to establish a specific method of intervention by the pharmacist and its clinical repercussions. Our aim was to identify interventions by pharmacists integrated within an interdisciplinary team for chronic complex patients (CCPs) and determine which of them produce the best results., Methods: A systematic review (SR) was performed based on PICO(d) question (2008-18): (Population): CCPs; (Intervention): carried out by health system pharmacists in collaboration with an interdisciplinary team; (Comparator): any; (Outcome): clinical and health resources usage outcomes; (Design): meta-analysis, SR and randomized clinical trials., Results: Nine articles were included: one SR and eight randomized clinical trials. The interventions consisted mainly in putting in order the pharmacotherapy and the review of the medication adequacy, medication reconciliation in transition of care and educational intervention for health professionals. Only one showed significant improvements in mortality (27.9% vs. 38.5%; HR = 1.49; P = 0.026), two in health-related quality of life [according to EQ-5D (European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions) and EQ-VAS (European Quality of Life-Visual Analog Scale) tests] and four in other health-related results (subjective self-assessment scales, falls or episodes of delirium and negative health outcomes associated with medication). Significant differences between groups were found in hospital stay and frequency of visits to the emergency department. No better results were observed in hospitalization rate. Otherwise, one study measured cost utility and found a cost of €45 987 per quality-adjusted life year gained due to the intervention., Conclusions: It was not possible to determine with certainty which interventions produce the best results in CCPs. The clinical heterogeneity of the studies and the short follow-up of most studies probably contributed to this uncertainty., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved.)