Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Tumori ; 99(1): 35-8, 2013.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23548997

RESUMO

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: In recent years, the number of oral anticancer drugs used in clinical practice has rapidly increased. The Italian Society of Medical Oncology (AIOM) conducted a survey to describe the impact of the use of oral anticancer drugs on the daily activity of Italian oncology practices. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: A survey questionnaire was distributed to the coordinators of the regional sections of AIOM. A 6-month period was considered, from January 1, 2010 to June 30, 2010. The survey addressed (1) quantitative aspects of the use of oral anticancer drugs; (2) practical aspects in the management of patients treated with these drugs; (3) issues related to treatment costs and reimbursement procedures. RESULTS: Thirty-six questionnaires were received from institutions distributed throughout the Italian territory. Oral anticancer drugs (both chemotherapy and molecularly targeted agents) accounted for a significant proportion (17%) of prescribed treatments. Among the responding institutions, there were different dispensation procedures of oral drugs to patients: drugs were dispensed by the pharmacist (57%) or directly by the medical oncologist (23%) or nurse (20%). The medical oncologist played a major role in the communication with patients (73% alone and a further 24% in cooperation with other professional figures) and was the point of reference in the event of side effects in 97% of cases. In most cases, the reimbursement of drug costs was separated ("File F" procedure) from the flat fare received by the hospital for outpatient visits or day-hospital access. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal organization of oral anticancer treatment warrants the cooperation and integration of multiple professional figures. At least three figures are involved in patient management in the hospital: the medical oncologist, the nurse, and the hospital pharmacist. Oral anticancer treatments are associated with specific reimbursement issues: in the majority of cases, the cost of the drug is reimbursed separately from the cost of patient access.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/administração & dosagem , Antineoplásicos/economia , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Oncologia/economia , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Mecanismo de Reembolso/organização & administração , Administração Oral , Adulto , Idoso , Custos de Medicamentos/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Pesquisas sobre Atenção à Saúde , Humanos , Itália/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Terapia de Alvo Molecular/economia , Enfermagem Oncológica/economia , Farmacêuticos/economia , Médicos/economia , Padrões de Prática Médica/economia , Sociedades Médicas , Inquéritos e Questionários , Recursos Humanos
2.
Tumori ; 97(4): 442-8, 2011.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21989431

RESUMO

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: In 2009, the Italian Society of Medical Oncology (AIOM) conducted a survey to describe the impact of regional pharmaceutical formularies on the disparity of access to eight new drugs among cancer patients treated in Italian regions. The survey documented some regional restrictions for some anti-cancer drugs. In the study, we analyzed the "time to patient access" to new anti-cancer drugs in Italian regions. METHODS: In March 2010, we analyzed the availability of 17 new anti-cancer drugs at a regional level, specifically the coherence of regional authorizations compared with national authorizations approved by the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA). In the regions with pharmaceutical formularies, we analyzed the characteristics of technical-scientific committees for the evaluation of inclusion of hospital drugs in these formularies. We also analyzed the time from EMA (CMPH) authorization to AIFA marketing authorization, the time from AIFA marketing authorization to patient availability, and the total time from EMA (CMPH) authorization to patient availability of the drugs in all Italian regions, for 11 of these drugs. RESULTS: Some drugs were included in all the regional pharmaceutical formularies, without restrictions, whereas other drugs were not included in one and others were not included in more than one formulary. Median time from EMA to AIFA was 11.2 months (range, 2.9-17.1). Median time from AIFA to patient availability was 1.4 months (range, 0.0-50.5) in regions with drug formularies versus 0.0 months in regions without drugs formularies. Median total time from EMA to patient availability was longer in regions with formularies (13.3 months; range, 2.9-65.3) than in regions without formularies (11.2 months; range, 2.9-24.0), where drugs are immediately available after AIFA marketing authorization. Moreover, the interval was very long (range, 2.9-65.3) for some drugs in regions with formularies. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis confirmed that the presence of multiple hierarchical levels of drug evaluation can create disparity in drug availability for Italian citizens.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Pesquisas sobre Atenção à Saúde , Humanos , Itália/epidemiologia , Oncologia , Sociedades Médicas , Fatores de Tempo
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...