ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The fruit oil from Acrocomia aculeata (Macauba or Bocaiuva) is highly rich in antioxidants and other bioactive compounds, emerging as a natural source of high potential for the modulation of chronic non-communicable diseases (NCDs), like diabetes. Its effects on chronic NCDs are poorly studied yet. Our review aimed to evaluate the therapeutic results of pharmaceutical preparations containing Acrocomia aculeata pulp oil that are used for chronic NCDs. METHOD: A search was performed using PICO acronyms in English, Portuguese, and Spanish languages in the MEDLINE®, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, LILACs, and CENTRAL Cochrane Library databases. The degree of agreement for selection and eligibility was significant (Kappa= 0.992; 95% CI: 0.988-0.996). The difference between the intervention and control groups for blood glucose reduction was 63.5 ± 69.5 mg/dL (p<0.0001). RESULT: Overall, an improvement percentage of 55.1 ± 0.1 was observed for the variables associated with chronic NCDs, which represented 89.96% of the relative risk reduction (efficacy). CONCLUSION: The Acrocomia aculeate pulp oil exhibited promising results in experimental studies for glycemic control and reduction of a specific tumor, indicating a good potential to be explored for chronic NCDs treatment.
ABSTRACT
Medication therapy management by pharmaceutical care (MTM-PC) has been shown to improve the effectiveness of antihypertensive treatments. The aim was to answer the question: what are the MTM-PC models and their impact on hypertensive patients' outcomes? This is a systematic review with meta-analysis. The search strategies were run on 27 September 2022 in the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, LILACs, Central Cochrane Library, Web of Science; and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts. The quality and bias risk was assessed by the Downs and Black instrument. Forty-one studies met the eligibility criteria and were included, Kappa = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.66-1.0; (p < 0.001). Twenty-seven studies (65.9%) had MTM-PC models outlined by the clinical team, showing as characteristics the mean of 10.0 ± 10.7 months of follow-up of hypertensive patients, with 7.7 ± 4.9 consultations. Instruments to assess the quality of life measured the enhancement by 13.4 ± 10.7% (p = 0.047). The findings of the meta-analysis show a mean reduction of -7.71 (95% CI, -10.93 to -4.48) and -3.66 (95% CI, -5.51 to -1.80), (p < 0.001) in mmHg systolic and diastolic pressures, respectively. Cardiovascular relative risk (RR) over ten years was 0.561 (95% CI, 0.422 to 0.742) and RR = 0.570 (95% CI, 0.431 to 0.750), considering homogeneous studies, I² = 0%. This study shows the prevalence of MTM-PC models outlined by the clinical team, in which there are differences according to the models in reducing blood pressure and cardiovascular risk over ten years with the improvement in quality of life.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Managed entry agreements (MEAs) consist of a set of instruments to reduce the uncertainty and the budget impact of new high-priced medicines; however, there are concerns. There is a need to critically appraise MEAs with their planned introduction in Brazil. Accordingly, the objective of this article is to identify and appraise key attributes and concerns with MEAs among payers and their advisers, with the findings providing critical considerations for Brazil and other high- and middle-income countries. METHODS: An integrative review approach was adopted. This involved a review of MEAs across countries. The review question was 'What are the health technology MEAs that have been applied around the world?' This review was supplemented with studies not retrieved in the search known to the senior-level co-authors including key South American markets. It also involved senior-level decision makers and advisers providing guidance on the potential advantages and disadvantages of MEAs and ways forward. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were included in the review. Most MEAs included medicines (96.8%), focused on financial arrangements (43%) and included mostly antineoplastic medicines. Most countries kept key information confidential including discounts or had not published such data. Few details were found in the literature regarding South America. Our findings and inputs resulted in both advantages including reimbursement and disadvantages including concerns with data collection for outcome-based schemes. CONCLUSIONS: We are likely to see a growth in MEAs with the continual launch of new high-priced and often complex treatments, coupled with increasing demands on resources. Whilst outcome-based MEAs could be an important tool to improve access to new innovative medicines, there are critical issues to address. Comparing knowledge, experiences, and practices across countries is crucial to guide high- and middle-income countries when designing their future MEAs.
