Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Article in Portuguese | LILACS, ECOS | ID: biblio-1291968

ABSTRACT

Objetivos: Este estudo teve como objetivo avaliar desfechos clínico-econômicos associados à vacina contra influenza quadrivalente baseada em células (QIVc) versus a vacina trivalente atualmente utilizada (TIVe) para prevenção sazonal de influenza no Programa Nacional de Imunizações (PNI) brasileiro. Métodos: Um modelo estático de árvore de decisão foi usado. Considerou-se um total de 54.071.642 indivíduos vacinados em 2019; a circulação de influenza por subtipo foi baseada em dados de vigilância epidemiológica. A efetividade da vacina (EV) TIVe foi extraída de metanálises publicadas; já a EV relativa da QIVc foi retirada de um estudo observacional retrospectivo. A incompatibilidade antigênica da vacina com vírus circulantes foi baseada em fontes retrospectivas internacionais. O uso de recursos baseou-se em estudos do mundo real. Custos unitários foram retirados de tabelas-padrão publicados em 2019 em reais (BRL). Resultados: Substituir a TIVe pela QIVc pode evitar, anualmente, casos sintomáticos (452.065) e reduzir visitas ambulatoriais (118.735), hospitalizações (15.466), mortes (2.753), custos médicos (-BRL 46.677.357) e custos indiretos (-BRL 59.962.135). O número anual de anos de vida ajustados por qualidade de vida (QALYs) pode aumentar em 96.129. Resultados de base a partir da perspectiva do pagador mostram uma razão de custo-efetividade incremental (RCEI) de BRL 17.293/QALY e, da perspectiva da sociedade, o RCEI obtido foi de um ganho de BRL 16.669/QALY. Usando o Produto Interno Bruto (PIB) brasileiro como um limiar (BRL 34.533/QALY), trocar a TIVe pela QIVc no PNI pode ser uma estratégia altamente custo-efetiva. Conclusões: O uso da QIVc pelo PNI tem potencial para ser altamente custo-efetivo tanto da perspectiva do pagador quanto da sociedade


Objectives: This study aimed to estimate health and economic outcomes associated to cell-based quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIVc) versus current trivalent influenza vaccines (TIVe) for seasonal influenza prevention in the Brazilian National Immunization Program (NIP), from the societal and public payer perspectives. Methods: A 1-year static decision-tree model based on literature was used. 54,071,642 total vaccinated individuals in 2019 were considered; influenza subtype circulation was based on Brazilian epidemiologic data (2009-2019). TIVe vaccine effectiveness (VE) was extracted from a published meta-analysis and QIVc relative VE from an international retrospective observational study. A/H3N2 egg-adaptation and B mismatch to recommended strain were gathered from international retrospective sources. Resource use was obtained from real-world studies. Inputs were adjusted to influenza subtype and multiple age groups with Brazilian literature. Unit costs were retrieved from published standard tables in 2019 Brazilian Reais (BRL). Results: Replacing TIVe with QIVc, can annually avert symptomatic cases (452,065) and reduce outpatient visits (118,735); hospitalizations (15,466), deaths (2,753), overall medical direct costs (-BRL 46,677,357) and indirect costs (-BRL 59,962,135). The annual number of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) could be increased by 96,129. Base case results from the payer perspective show an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of BRL 17,293/QALY gained and from the societal perspective the ICER obtained was BRL 16,669/QALY gained. Using the Brazilian Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as a threshold (BRL 34,533/QALY) switching TIVe with QIVc in the NIP can be a highly cost-effective strategy, leading to a high QALY increment and preventing medical and indirect costs. Conclusions: The use of QIVc by the NIP has the potential to be highly cost-effective in the payer and society perspective


Subject(s)
Influenza Vaccines , Immunization Programs , Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
2.
Arch. argent. pediatr ; 112(2): 183-191, abr. 2014.
Article in Spanish | LILACS, BINACIS | ID: biblio-1159587

ABSTRACT

Las infecciones de piel y partes blandas son una causa frecuente de consulta en los centros de atención primaria de la salud. Los datos de la epidemiología local de estas infecciones son escasos; el Staphylococcus aureus y el Streptococcus pyogenes son los principales agentes etiológicos. La emergencia, en los últimos años, de cepas de S. aureus meticilino resistentes provenientes de la comunidad y S. pyogenes resistentes a eritromicina plantea controversia en la elección del tratamiento empírico inicial. Este consenso nacional está dirigido a médicos pediatras, de familia, dermatólogos, infectólogos y otros profesionales de la salud. Trata el manejo clínico, especialmente el diagnóstico y tratamiento, de las infecciones de piel y partes blandas de origen bacteriano provenientes de la comunidad en pacientes inmunocompetentes menores de 19 años de edad.


Skin and soft tissue infections are a common reason for consultation in primary health care centers. Data from the local epidemiology of these infections are rare, but Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes are known to be the major etiologic agents. The appearance in recent years of community-originated strains of methicillin-resistant S. aureus and erythromycin-resistant pyogenes raises controversy in the choice of initial empirical treatment. This national consensus is for pediatricians, dermatologists, infectologists and other health professionals. It is about clinical management, especially the diagnosis and treatment of community-originated skin and soft tissue infections in immunocompetent patients under the age of 19.


Subject(s)
Humans , Child , Skin Diseases, Infectious/diagnosis , Skin Diseases, Infectious/therapy , Soft Tissue Infections/diagnosis , Soft Tissue Infections/therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL