Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters











Language
Publication year range
1.
Marseille; Aix Marseille University Public Health Department; Apr. 13, 2020. 22 p.
Monography in English | BIGG - GRADE guidelines | ID: biblio-1116702

ABSTRACT

China has managed to control the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) with confinement measurements and treatment strategies, while other countries are struggling to contain the spread. This study discussesthe guidelines related to COVID-19 in China in order to provide important references for other countries in the fight against COVID-19. Chinese guidelines relevant to COVID-19 were systematically searched via the China National Knowledge Infrastructure database, YiMaiTong database, and World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 database on March 20th , 2020. Guideline information was extracted, including date of publication, source, objectives and the target population. Guidelines specific to the pharmacological treatment of COVID-19 were further investigated to identify the types of antivirus drugs recommended and to report on how treatment recommendations for COVID-19 have evolvedovertime. A total of 114 guidelines were identified, of which 87 were national guidelines and 27 were regional guidelines. The scope of included guidelines consisted of: the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19, the management of hospital departments and specific diseases during the outbreak of COVID-19. Sixty-four of theincluded guidelines targeted all COVID-19 patients, whilethe remainingguidelines concentrated onspecialpatientpopulations (i.e., geriatric population, pediatric population, and pregnant population) or patients with coexistingdiseases. Twenty-three guidelines focused on the pharmacological treatments for all COVID-19 patients.Interferon, Lopinavir/Ritonavir, Ribavirin, Chloroquine, and Umifenovir represented the most recommended antivirus drugs. With the emergence of encouraging results from preclinical and preliminary clinical studies, Chloroquine Phosphate was recommended in the national Diagnosis and Treatment Protocol for NovelCoronavirus Pneumonia (6th version) on February 19th, 2020. Thereafter, more detailed guidelines regarding theadjustment of dosage regimens and the monitoring of adverse events of Chloroquine Phosphatewere published. To date, 8 Chinese guidelines have recommendedChloroquine Phosphate or Hydroxychloroquine as mainstream antivirusdrug for the treatment of COVID-19. China has generated a plethora of guidelines covering almost all aspects of COVID-19. Chloroquine, as one widely affordable treatment, holds great potential to become the gold standard choice as more clinical evidence is shared by researchers from China as well as other countries.


Subject(s)
Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Ribavirin/therapeutic use , China/epidemiology , Chloroquine/therapeutic use , Interferons/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Epidemiological Monitoring , Health Information Management/methods , Betacoronavirus/drug effects
2.
Eur J Health Econ ; 20(4): 513-524, 2019 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30539335

ABSTRACT

Health insurers may use financial incentives to encourage their enrollees to choose preferred providers for medical treatment. Empirical evidence whether differences in cost-sharing rates across providers affects patient choice behavior is, especially from Europe, limited. This paper examines the effect of a differential deductible to steer patient provider choice in a Dutch regional market for varicose veins treatment. Using individual patients' choice data and information about their out-of-pocket payments covering the year of the experiment and 1 year before, we estimate a conditional logit model that explicitly controls for pre-existing patient preferences. Our results suggest that in this natural experiment designating preferred providers and waiving the deductible for enrollees using these providers significantly influenced patient choice. The average cross-price elasticity of demand is found to be 0.02, indicating that patient responsiveness to the cost-sharing differential itself was low. Unlike fixed cost-sharing differences, the deductible exemption was conditional on the patient's other medical expenses occurring in the policy year. The differential deductible did, therefore, not result in a financial benefit for patients with annual costs exceeding their total deductible.


Subject(s)
Consumer Behavior/statistics & numerical data , Deductibles and Coinsurance/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Choice Behavior , Consumer Behavior/economics , Female , Health Expenditures/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Theoretical , Netherlands , Preferred Provider Organizations/economics , Preferred Provider Organizations/organization & administration , Preferred Provider Organizations/statistics & numerical data , Varicose Veins/economics , Varicose Veins/therapy , Young Adult
3.
Eur J Health Econ ; 17(5): 645-52, 2016 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26231983

ABSTRACT

In market-based health care systems, channeling patients to designated preferred providers can increase payer's bargaining clout, other things being equal. In the unique setting of the new Dutch health care system with regulated competition, this paper evaluates the impact of a 1-year natural experiment with patient channeling on providers' market shares. In 2009 a large regional Dutch health insurer designated preferred providers for two different procedures (cataract surgery and varicose veins treatment) and gave its enrollees a positive financial incentive for choosing them. That is, patients were exempted from paying their deductible when they went to a preferred provider. Using claims data over the period 2007-2009, we apply a difference-in-difference approach to study the impact of this channeling strategy on the allocation of patients across individual providers. Our estimation results show that, in the year of the experiment, preferred providers of varicose veins treatment on average experienced a significant increase in patient volume relative to non-preferred providers. However, for cataract surgery no significant effect is found. Possible explanations for the observed difference between both procedures may be the insurer's selection of preferred providers and the design of the channeling incentive resulting in different expected financial benefits for both patient groups.


Subject(s)
Deductibles and Coinsurance/statistics & numerical data , Preferred Provider Organizations/statistics & numerical data , Cataract Extraction/economics , Cataract Extraction/statistics & numerical data , Deductibles and Coinsurance/economics , Humans , Insurance Claim Review , Netherlands , Varicose Veins/economics , Varicose Veins/therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL