Transition to ePrescribing for systemic anti-cancer therapy - Perceptions of a multidisciplinary haematology/oncology team in a large teaching hospital.

INTRODUCTION: A National Cancer Information System is planned for phased implementation in Irish cancer centres to enable electronic prescribing (ePrescribing) of systemic anti-cancer therapy. This study aimed to capture the opinions of healthcare professionals in a hospital setting relating to the current paper-based workflow for systemic anti-cancer therapy prescribing and their attitudes and expectations of the new ePrescribing system to develop recommendations, which assist in the planning and implementation of future ePrescribing systems. METHODS: A mixed methods study of concurrent design was conducted. Interviews with healthcare professionals primarily aimed to evaluate processes and identify areas requiring improvement within the current paper-based workflow for systemic anti-cancer therapy prescribing. An online questionnaire adapted from the Information Systems Expectations and Experiences tool primarily aimed to capture expectations of the new ePrescribing system and attitudes towards the transition. RESULTS: Twelve healthcare professionals were interviewed, and 50 healthcare professionals responded to the online questionnaire (response rate: 33.3%). Eight major themes emerged from interview transcripts relating to opinions on the paper-based workflow. Questionnaire respondents reported positive attitudes towards ePrescribing implementation and had high expectations for workflow improvements and functionalities of the new system. Seven recommendations for ePrescribing implementation were developed: (1) prioritise specific processes; (2) plan for changes in communication; (3) repeat research in the post-implementation setting; (4) ensure good information technology infrastructure and system support; (5) ensure optimum training; (6) outline limitations of clinical decision support; (7) provide clear instructions on local configurability. CONCLUSION: This study identifies potential challenges in transitioning to ePrescribing and provides recommendations, which assist stakeholders in ensuring safe and effective transitions, thus informing future ePrescribing systems' implementation in haematology/oncology settings.

Reviewing the cost-effectiveness of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods in an Australian context.

BACKGROUND: Relative to the oral contraceptive pill, uptake of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods (LARCs) in Australia continues to be lower than might be suggested by the evidence on their clinical and economic benefits. AIM: To undertake a critical appraisal of published economic evaluations of LARCs to assess the generalisability of their results to the Australian healthcare context. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search of the literature was conducted to identify studies of economic evaluations of LARCs using the Medline, Embase and PubMed databases. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. RESULTS: A total of 1009 citations were screened, from which 20 papers, typically reporting the cost per pregnancy avoided, were reviewed. The overall quality of the studies varied but was generally poor (average score of 62/100). To aid comparisons, results have been grouped under the headings IUS (all hormonal intrauterine systems), IUDs (all non-hormonal intrauterine devices), injectables (all contraceptive injections) and implants (all subdermal contraceptive implants). Overall, the results indicated that LARCs were more effective and less costly than oral contraceptives. CONCLUSIONS: Despite evidence that LARCs represent value for money, limitations in study quality and approaches must be taken into account when applying these results to Australia. Differences in healthcare settings aside, LARCs may also have benefits beyond their effect on pregnancy that might be captured in broader analyses, such as cost-benefit analyses using willingness to pay methods. These would capture benefits beyond health, which seem to be particularly relevant to contraception.

Comparing the cost of preparing matched unrelated donor and TCR α+ ß+ /CD19+ depleted donor material for pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplants in Australia.

Use of TCR α+ ß+ /CD19+ depletion in a pediatric setting has improved the utility of haploidentical donor material, resulting in better rates of engraftment, lower rates of graft vs host disease (GVHD), and improved transplant-related mortality. There are currently no data available on the costs of TCR α+ ß+ /CD19+ depletion. This study assessed the costs of acquiring and preparing TCR α+ ß+ /CD19+ depleted haploidentical donor cells in comparison with matched unrelated donor (MUD) products for use in pediatric patients in Australia. Data from four pediatric transplant centers were used to estimate the resources required for donor work-up, graft acquisition, and laboratory procedures for graft preparation. Information on MUD work-up and graft acquisition was also acquired from these sites and from the national coordinating donor center in Australia. Australian-specific prices and fees were used to estimate total average costs for each transplant type, converted to USD. Preparation of graft material (including work-up, acquisition, and laboratory processes) costs USD 28 963 for TCR α+ ß+ /CD19+ depleted haploidentical grafts and USD 27 297 for MUD grafts. The estimated difference of USD 1666 is largely attributed to the process and consumables to perform TCR α+ ß+ /CD19+ depletion. Given the potential for recipients of TCR α+ ß+ /CD19+ depleted grafts to require minimal GVHD prophylaxis and experience less transplant-related morbidity and mortality, use of TCR α+ ß+ /CD19+ depletion appears favorable despite the higher initial cost. Research is currently ongoing to assess the clinical effectiveness and potential cost-effectiveness of TCR α+ ß+ /CD19+ depletion over a patients' lifetime.

Using prediction intervals from random-effects meta-analyses in an economic model.

OBJECTIVES: When incorporating treatment effect estimates derived from a random-effect meta-analysis it is tempting to use the confidence bounds to determine the potential range of treatment effect. However, prediction intervals reflect the potential effect of a technology rather than the more narrowly defined average treatment effect. Using a case study of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, this study investigates the impact on a cost-utility analysis of using clinical effectiveness derived from random-effects meta-analyses presented as confidence bounds and prediction intervals, respectively. METHODS: To determine the cost-utility of robot-assisted prostatectomy, an economic model was developed. The clinical effectiveness of robot-assisted surgery compared with open and conventional laparoscopic surgery was estimated using meta-analysis of peer-reviewed publications. Assuming treatment effect would vary across studies due to both sampling variability and differences between surgical teams, random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool effect estimates. RESULTS: Using the confidence bounds approach the mean and median ICER was €24,193 and €26,731/QALY (95%CI: €13,752 to €68,861/QALY), respectively. The prediction interval approach produced an equivalent mean and median ICER of €26,920 and €26,643/QALY (95%CI: -€135,244 to €239,166/QALY), respectively. Using prediction intervals, there is a probability of 0.042 that robot-assisted surgery will result in a net reduction in QALYs. CONCLUSIONS: Using prediction intervals rather than confidence bounds does not affect the point estimate of the treatment effect. In meta-analyses with significant heterogeneity, the use of prediction intervals will produce wider ranges of treatment effect, and hence result in greater uncertainty, but a better reflection of the effect of the technology.

Effectiveness of systematic screening for the detection of atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia in clinical practice and is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Screening for AF in asymptomatic patients has been proposed as a way of reducing the burden of the disease by detecting people who would benefit from prophylactic anticoagulation therapy prior to the onset of symptoms. However, for screening to be an effective intervention it must improve the detection of AF and provide benefit for those who are detected earlier as a result of screening. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this review was to examine whether screening programmes increase the detection of new cases of AF compared to routine practice. The secondary objectives were to identify which combination of screening strategy and patient population is most effective, as well as assessing any safety issues associated with screening, its acceptability within the target population and the costs involved. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE (Ovid) up to March 2012. Other relevant research databases, trials registries and websites were searched up to June 2012. Reference lists of identified studies were also searched for potentially relevant studies and we contacted corresponding authors for information about additional published or unpublished studies that may be relevant. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series studies comparing screening for AF with routine practice in people aged 40 years and over were eligible. Two authors (PM, CT or MF) independently selected the trials for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Assessment of risk of bias and data extraction were performed independently by two authors (PM, CT). Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to present the results for the primary outcome, which is a dichotomous variable. Since only one included study was identified, no meta-analysis was performed. MAIN RESULTS: One cluster randomised controlled trial met the inclusion criteria for this review. This study compared systematic screening (by invitation to have an electrocardiogram (ECG)) and opportunistic screening (pulse palpation during a general practitioner (GP) consultation for any reason followed by an ECG if pulse was irregular) to routine practice (normal case finding on the basis of clinical presentation) in people aged 65 years or older. The risk of bias in the included study was judged to be low.Both systematic and opportunistic screening of people over the age of 65 years are more effective than routine practice (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.26 and OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.29, respectively). The number needed to screen in order to detect one additional case compared to routine practice was 172 (95% CI 94 to 927) for systematic screening and 167 (95% CI 92 to 806) for opportunistic screening. Both systematic and opportunistic screening were more effective in men (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.76 and OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.19, respectively) than in women (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.62 and OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.93, respectively). No data on the effectiveness of screening in different ethnic or socioeconomic groups were available. There were insufficient data to compare the effectiveness of screening programmes in different healthcare settings.Systematic screening was associated with a better overall uptake rate than opportunistic screening (53% versus 46%) except in the ≥ 75 years age group where uptake rates were similar (43% versus 42%). In both screening programmes men were more likely to participate than women (57% versus 50% in systematic screening, 49% versus 41% in opportunistic screening) and younger people (65 to 74 years) were more likely to participate than people aged 75 years and over (61% versus 43% systematic, 49% versus 42% opportunistic). No adverse events associated with screening were reported.The incremental cost per additional case detected by opportunistic screening was GBP 337, compared to GBP 1514 for systematic screening. All cost estimates were based on data from the single included trial, which was conducted in the UK between 2001 and 2003. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Systematic and opportunistic screening for AF increase the rate of detection of new cases compared with routine practice. While both approaches have a comparable effect on the overall AF diagnosis rate, the cost of systematic screening is significantly more than that of opportunistic screening from the perspective of the health service provider. The lack of studies investigating the effect of screening in other health systems and younger age groups means that caution needs to be exercised in relation to the transferability of these results beyond the setting and population in which the included study was conducted.Additional research is needed to examine the effectiveness of alternative screening strategies and to investigate the effect of the intervention on the risk of stroke for screened versus non-screened populations.

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open and laparoscopic approaches: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Medline and Embase were searched for studies comparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with open prostatectomy and conventional laparoscopic prostatectomy. Random effects meta-analysis was used to calculate a pooled estimate of effect. The 95% prediction intervals are also reported. One randomized study and 50 observational studies were identified. The results show that compared with open surgery, robot-assisted surgery is associated with fewer positive surgical margins for pT2 tumors (relative risk 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.49-0.81, P < 0.001) and improved outcomes for sexual function at 12 months (relative risk 1.60, 95% confidence interval 1.33-1.93, P = <0.001), and, to a lesser extent, urinary function at 12 months (relative risk 1.06, 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.11, P < 0.01). Compared with conventional laparoscopic prostatectomy, robot-assisted surgery is associated with a slight increase in urinary function at 12 months (relative risk 1.09, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.17, P = 0.013). The overall methodological quality of the included studies was low, with high levels of heterogeneity. The use of prediction intervals as an aid to decision making in regard to the introduction of this technology is examined. Clinically significant improvements in positive surgical margins rates for pT2 tumors and sexual function at 12 months associated with robot-assisted surgery in comparison with open surgery should be interpreted with caution given the limitations of the evidence. Differences between robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic surgery are minimal.

Robot-assisted hysterectomy compared to open and laparoscopic approaches: systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To review the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted hysterectomy compared to traditional open and conventional laparoscopic surgery, differentiating radical, simple total with node staging, and simple total hysterectomy. METHODS: Medline, Embase, the Cochrane library, and the Journal of Robotic Surgery were searched for controlled trials and observational studies with historic or concurrent controls. Data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Compared to open surgery, robot-assisted radical hysterectomy is associated with reduced hospital stay and blood transfusions. For simple total hysterectomy with node staging, robot-assisted surgery is associated with reduced hospital stay, complications, and blood transfusions compared to open surgery. Compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery, robot-assisted simple total hysterectomy with node staging is associated with complications and conversions. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to open surgery, robot-assisted hysterectomy offers benefits for reduced length of hospital stay and blood transfusions. The best evidence of improved outcomes is for simple total hysterectomy with node staging. Study quality was poor.

Cost-effectiveness of prion filtration of red blood cells to reduce the risk of transfusion-transmitted variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in the Republic of Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD) is a rare, progressive fatal noninflammatory neurodegenerative disease. Ireland has the second highest rate of vCJD in the world with an ongoing risk of vCJD transmission through blood transfusion. Prion-removing filters have been developed to reduce the risk of vCJD transmission. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of implementing a policy of prion filtration of red blood cells (RBCs) in the Republic of Ireland. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A cost-effectiveness model was developed to simulate the likelihood of RBC recipients developing clinical vCJD as a result of being transfused with infected RBCs. Model variables were collected from published literature and expert opinion. Costs were estimated based on the processing changes required to implement prion filtration. RESULTS: In the absence of prion filtration, it is estimated that two individuals will develop clinical vCJD arising from RBC transfusions over a 10-year time horizon. The discounted life-years lost will be 18.5 years. With prion filtration, there will be no deaths or life-years lost. The discounted cost of universal prion filtration is €68.2 million over 10 years with a corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €3.7 million per life-year gained. In 25.3% of simulations there were no deaths from vCJD infection through infected blood transfusions, irrespective of prion filtration. CONCLUSION: Prion filtration is considered not cost-effective by traditional measures. Although numerous non-cost-effective blood safety strategies have been implemented in the past, consideration should be given to the most efficient use of finite resources in transfusion medicine.