Cost analysis of chronic pain due to musculoskeletal disorders in Chile.

The magnitude of the cost of chronic pain has been a matter of concern in many countries worldwide. The high prevalence, the cost it implies for the health system, productivity, and absenteeism need to be addressed urgently. Studies have begun describing this problem in Chile, but there is still a debt in highlighting its importance and urgency on contributing to chronic pain financial coverage. This study objective is to estimate the expected cost of chronic pain and its related musculoskeletal diseases in the Chilean adult population. We conducted a mathematical decision model exercise, Markov Model, to estimate costs and consequences. Patients were classified into severe, moderate, and mild pain groups, restricted to five diseases: knee osteoarthritis, hip osteoarthritis, lower back pain, shoulder pain, and fibromyalgia. Data analysis considered a set of transition probabilities to estimate the total cost, sick leave payment, and productivity losses. Results show that the total annual cost for chronic pain in Chile is USD 943,413,490, corresponding an 80% to the five diseases studied. The highest costs are related to therapeutic management, followed by productivity losses and sick leave days. Low back pain and fibromyalgia are both the costlier chronic pain-related musculoskeletal diseases. We can conclude that the magnitude of the cost in our country's approach to chronic pain is related to increased productivity losses and sick leave payments. Incorporating actions to ensure access and financial coverage and new care strategies that reorganize care delivery to more integrated and comprehensive care could potentially impact costs in both patients and the health system. Finally, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic will probably deepen even more this problem.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine booster in solid organ transplant recipients previously immunised with inactivated versus mRNA vaccines: A prospective cohort study.

Background: Solid-organ transplant (SOT) recipients have worse COVID-19 outcomes than general population and effective immunisation in these patients is essential but more difficult to reach. We aimed to determine the immunogenicity of an mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine booster in SOT recipients previously immunised with either inactivated or homologous SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine. Methods: Prospective cohort study of SOT recipients under medical care at Red de Salud UC-CHRISTUS, Chile, previously vaccinated with either CoronaVac or BNT162b2. All participants received a BNT162b2 vaccine booster. The primary study end point was anti-SARS-CoV-2 total IgG antibodies (TAb) seropositivity at 8-12 weeks (56-84 days) post booster. Secondary end points included neutralising antibodies (NAb) and specific T-cell responses. Findings: A total of 140 (50% kidney, 38% liver, 6% heart) SOT recipients (mean age 54 [13.6] years; 64 [46%] women) were included. Of them, 62 had homologous (three doses of BNT162b2) and 78 heterologous vaccine schedules (two doses of CoronaVac followed by BNT162b2 booster). Boosters were received at a median of 21.3 weeks after primary vaccination. The proportion achieving TAb seropositivity (82.3% vs 65.4%, P = 0.035) and NAb positivity (77.4% vs 55.1%, P = 0.007) were higher for the homologous versus the heterologous group. On the other hand, the number of IFN-γ and IL-2 secreting SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cells did not differ significantly between groups. Interpretation: This cohort study shows that homologous mRNA vaccine priming plus boosting in SOT recipients, reaches a significantly higher humoral immune response than inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine priming followed by heterologous mRNA booster. Funding: School of Medicine, UC-Chile and ANID.ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05124509.

Early versus deferred anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma in patients admitted for COVID-19: A randomized phase II clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma (CP), despite limited evidence on its efficacy, is being widely used as a compassionate therapy for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of early CP therapy in COVID-19 progression. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The study was an open-label, single-center randomized clinical trial performed in an academic medical center in Santiago, Chile, from May 10, 2020, to July 18, 2020, with final follow-up until August 17, 2020. The trial included patients hospitalized within the first 7 days of COVID-19 symptom onset, presenting risk factors for illness progression and not on mechanical ventilation. The intervention consisted of immediate CP (early plasma group) versus no CP unless developing prespecified criteria of deterioration (deferred plasma group). Additional standard treatment was allowed in both arms. The primary outcome was a composite of mechanical ventilation, hospitalization for >14 days, or death. The key secondary outcomes included time to respiratory failure, days of mechanical ventilation, hospital length of stay, mortality at 30 days, and SARS-CoV-2 real-time PCR clearance rate. Of 58 randomized patients (mean age, 65.8 years; 50% male), 57 (98.3%) completed the trial. A total of 13 (43.3%) participants from the deferred group received plasma based on clinical aggravation. We failed to find benefit in the primary outcome (32.1% versus 33.3%, odds ratio [OR] 0.95, 95% CI 0.32-2.84, p > 0.999) in the early versus deferred CP group. The in-hospital mortality rate was 17.9% versus 6.7% (OR 3.04, 95% CI 0.54-17.17 p = 0.246), mechanical ventilation 17.9% versus 6.7% (OR 3.04, 95% CI 0.54-17.17, p = 0.246), and prolonged hospitalization 21.4% versus 30.0% (OR 0.64, 95% CI, 0.19-2.10, p = 0.554) in the early versus deferred CP group, respectively. The viral clearance rate on day 3 (26% versus 8%, p = 0.204) and day 7 (38% versus 19%, p = 0.374) did not differ between groups. Two patients experienced serious adverse events within 6 hours after plasma transfusion. The main limitation of this study is the lack of statistical power to detect a smaller but clinically relevant therapeutic effect of CP, as well as not having confirmed neutralizing antibodies in donor before plasma infusion. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, we failed to find evidence of benefit in mortality, length of hospitalization, or mechanical ventilation requirement by immediate addition of CP therapy in the early stages of COVID-19 compared to its use only in case of patient deterioration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04375098.