Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
Diabetes Res Clin Pract ; 106(3): e53-5, 2014 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25467618

RESUMO

Our aim was to identify women diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) using 1999 WHO diagnostic criteria but who would be now classified as normal glucose tolerance (NGT) using updated criteria. We demonstrate that this category change affected 3.3% women and they have a limited increased risk of adverse outcomes.


Assuntos
Diabetes Gestacional/diagnóstico , Teste de Tolerância a Glucose/classificação , Adulto , Diabetes Gestacional/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Fatores de Risco , Organização Mundial da Saúde
2.
J Hepatol ; 48(3): 407-14, 2008 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18045724

RESUMO

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We examined the cost and cost effectiveness of distal splenorenal shunt (DSRS) and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) in the prevention of variceal rebleeding. METHODS: Patients participated in a randomized controlled trial comparing DSRS to TIPS. Quality of life (QOL) was measured using SF-36 preceding randomization and yearly thereafter. Cost utility analysis was performed using TreeAge DATA. Costs for both in- and out-patient events and interventions were obtained for each patient. Costs using coated stents were estimated using different rates of stenosis. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were determined at 1, 3 and 5 years. RESULTS: The average yearly costs of managing patients after TIPS and DSRS over 5 years were similar, $16,363 and $13,492, respectively. Cost of TIPS for surviving patients exceeded the cost of DSRS at years 3 and 5 but not significantly. ICERs per life saved favored TIPS at year 5 ($61,000). If coated rather than bare stents were used the cost effectiveness of TIPS increased slightly. CONCLUSIONS: TIPS is as effective as DSRS in preventing variceal rebleeding and may be more cost effective. TIPS, in all aspects, is equal to DSRS in the prevention of variceal rebleeding in patients who are medical failures.


Assuntos
Varizes Esofágicas e Gástricas/cirurgia , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/prevenção & controle , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/cirurgia , Derivação Portossistêmica Transjugular Intra-Hepática/economia , Derivação Esplenorrenal Cirúrgica/economia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Varizes Esofágicas e Gástricas/complicações , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiologia , Humanos , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Terapia de Salvação/economia , Terapia de Salvação/métodos , Prevenção Secundária , Stents , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 43(7): 1217-24, 2004 Apr 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15063433

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the relative cost of a transesophageal echocardiography (TEE)-guided strategy versus conventional strategy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) >2 days duration undergoing electrical cardioversion over an eight-week period. BACKGROUND: The Assessment of Cardioversion Using Transesophageal Echocardiography (ACUTE) trial found no difference in embolic rates between the two approaches. However, the TEE-guided strategy had a shorter time to cardioversion and a lower rate of composite bleeding. While similar clinical efficacy was concluded, the relative cost of these two strategies has not been explored. METHODS: Two economic approaches were employed in the ACUTE trial. The first approach was based on hospital charge data from complete hospital Universal Billing Code of 1992 forms, a detailed hospital charge questionnaire, or imputation. Regression analysis was used to investigate the added cost of adverse events. The second economic approach involved the development of an independent analytic model simulating treatment and actual ACUTE outcome costs as a validation of clinically derived data. Sensitivity analysis was performed on the analytic model to investigate the potential range in cost differences between the strategies. RESULTS: A total of 833 of the 1,222 patients were enrolled from 53 U.S. sites; TEE-guided (n = 420) and conventional (n = 413). At eight-week follow-up, total mean costs did not significantly differ between the two groups, respectively (6,508 dollars vs. 6,239 dollars; difference of 269 dollars; p = 0.50). Cumulative costs were 24% higher in the conventional group, primarily due to increased incidence of bleeding and hospital costs associated with bleeding. A separate analytic model showed that treatment costs were higher for the TEE-guided strategy, but outcome costs were higher for the conventional strategy. Sensitivity analysis of the analytic model illustrated that varying the incidence and cost of major bleeding and the cost of TEE had the greatest impact on cost differences between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AF >2 days duration undergoing electrical cardioversion, the TEE-guided group showed little difference in patient costs compared with the conventional group. The TEE strategy had higher initial treatment costs but lower outcome-associated costs. Cumulative costs were 24% higher in the conventional group, primarily due to bleeding. The TEE-guided strategy is an economically feasible approach compared with the conventional strategy.


Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial/diagnóstico por imagem , Fibrilação Atrial/terapia , Ecocardiografia Transesofagiana/economia , Cardioversão Elétrica/economia , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Fibrilação Atrial/economia , Feminino , Seguimentos , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Análise Multivariada , Estudos Prospectivos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Inquéritos e Questionários , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...