Economic evaluation of interventions to improve medication adherence among patients with chronic diseases: an overview of systematic reviews.

INTRODUCTION: This overview aimed to find, assess, and synthesize systematic reviews that compared the cost-effectiveness of interventions designed to improve medication adherence among patients with chronic disease. AREAS COVERED: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Center for Review and Dissemination were searched. The quality of the included reviews was assessed using two validated checklists. The review characteristics and findings were summarized narratively. A total of 9 systematic reviews were included. Interventions reported to be cost-effective were simplification of the medication regimen, financial incentives, improved coverage or reduced out-of-pocket spending, and pharmacist care. The most common interventions were patient education and counseling, with mixed results of cost-effectiveness. This evidence comes from economic evaluations with varying degrees of quality. EXPERT OPINION: Future evaluations of adherence interventions' cost-effectiveness will be improved in quality as our understanding of the reasons behind intentional and unintentional nonadherence and factors associated with this behavior advances. The development of criteria for the value assessment of medication adherence-enhancing interventions will contribute to improving the quality of adherence intervention cost-effectiveness research.

Evaluation of Prevalence of Side-Effects Associated with Booster Dose of mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccine Among Healthcare Workers in Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: The purpose of this study was to examine the mild and moderate side-effects experienced by the healthcare workers (HCWs) in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia after receiving the booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech/BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine. Methods: We directed a descriptive cross-sectional study among adults living in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. A survey link was distributed through WhatsApp, SMS, or e-mail to HCWs. Participants' general and demographic information were also collected, as well as information about any local and systemic side-effects reported following vaccination. Results: The results of this study showed that 81.84% (401/490) of the HCWs who contributed to this study reported the minimum COVID-19 post-vaccination side-effect. Body pain (89%) and pain at the site of injection (88.73%) were the most frequent frequently reported side-effects, followed by headache (28.68%), joint or bone pain (27.18%), muscle pain (26.43%), nausea or vomiting (21.2%), fever (18.95%), skin rashes (10.22%). History of chronic diseases had a 0.44-fold increased risk of side-effects compared to no history of chronic diseases HCWs (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.44; 95% CI = 0.224, 0.880), and significant association of occupation with side-effects was also 1.61-fold increased risk compared to nonmedical ((aOR) = 1.61; 95% CI = 1.037, 2.513). Conclusion: According to this study, the Pfizer-BioNTech/BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine was safe when given to Saudi Arabian HCWs. All reported side-effects were mild to moderate. The outcomes indicated that most participants had body pain and pain at the site of injection and fatigue is among the least reported side-effect post-booster dose. Healthcare was highly connected with more reporting of side-effects.