No abstract

In order to assess the effectiveness of sildenafil under routine conditions of use in primary care settings and to evaluate its impact on patient's life satisfaction and partner's satisfaction with treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED), an open, multicentre, observational, prospective study was designed in which 2816 patients were treated with sildenafil for at least 10 weeks. Effectiveness was assessed using the International Index of Erectile Dysfunction (IIEF), life satisfaction was measured with 'Life-satisfaction Check List' (LISAT 8), and EDITS was optionally used to assess the partner's satisfaction with ED therapy. Sildenafil was effective in 86.6% of patients. All dimensions of IIEF significantly increased with sildenafil, particularly erectile domain which overall sample mean score improved was 13.2 points (P < 0.001). The greatest increases in satisfaction with all aspects of life were seen in sex life and relationship with partner dimensions. The patients' partners, answered by a minority of partners, were highly satisfied with the treatment and its rapid action, therefore they were in favour of continuing with same. The adverse events occurring were similar to those seen in clinical research on sildenafil in the premarketing phase. No control group was included in this study.

BackgroundSchizophrenia is a severe form of mental illness which is associated with significant and long-lasting health, social and financial burdens.The aim of this project is to assess the efficiency of the antipsychotics used in Spain in reducing schizophrenia relapses under the Spanish Health System perspective.Material and methodsA decision-analytic model was developed to explore the relative cost-effectiveness of five antipsychotic medications, amisulpride, aripiprazole, olanzapine, paliperidone Extended-Release (ER) and risperidone, compared to haloperidol, over a 1-year treatment period among people living in Spain with schizophrenia. The transition probabilities for assessed therapies were obtained from the systemic review and meta-analysis performed by National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE).ResultsPaliperidone ER was the option that yielded more quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained per patient (0.7573). In addition, paliperidone ER was the least costly strategy (€3,062), followed by risperidone (€3,194), haloperidol (€3,322), olanzapine (€3,893), amisulpride (€4,247) and aripiprazole (€4,712).In the incremental cost-effectiveness (ICE) analysis of the assessed antipsychotics compared to haloperidol, paliperidone ER and risperidone were dominant options. ICE ratios for other medications were €23,621/QALY gained, €91,584/QALY gained and €94,558/QALY gained for olanzapine, amisulpride and aripiprazole, respectively. Deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that risperidone is always dominant when compared to haloperidol. Paliperidone ER is also dominant apart from the exception of the scenario with a 20% decrease in the probability of relapses.ConclusionsOur findings may be of interest to clinicians and others interested in outcomes and cost of mental health services among patients with schizophrenia.Paliperidone ER and risperidone were shown to be dominant therapies compared to haloperidol in Spain. It is worthwhile to highlight that schizophrenia is a highly incapacitating disease and choosing the most appropriate drug and formulation for a particular patient is crucial.The availability of more accurate local epidemiological data on schizophrenia would allow a better adaptation of the model avoiding some of the assumptions taken in our work. Future research could be focused on this.

No abstract

BackgroundThis study aimed at estimating the efficiency of palivizumab in the prevention of Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) infection and its sequelae in preterm infants (32day 1-35day 0weeks of gestational age –wGA-) in Spain.MethodsA decision-tree model was developed to compare health benefits (Quality Adjusted Life Years-QALYs) and costs of palivizumab versus a non-prophylaxis strategy over 6 years. A hypothetical cohort of 1,000 preterm infants, 32day 1-35day 0 wGA (4.356 kg average weight) at the beginning of the prophylaxis (15 mg/kg of palivizumab; 3.88 average number of injections per RSV season) was analysed.The model considered the most recent evidence from Spanish observational and epidemiological studies on RSV infection: the FLIP II study provided hospital admission and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission rates; in-hospital mortality rate was drawn from an epidemiological study from 2004 to 2012; recurrent wheezing rates associated to RSV infection from SPRING study were adjusted by the evidence on the palivizumab effect from clinical trials. Quality of life baseline value, number of hospitalized infants and the presence of recurrent wheezing over time were granted to estimate QALYs.National Health Service and societal perspective (included also recurrent wheezing indirect cost) were analysed. Total costs (€, 2016) included pharmaceutical and administration costs, hospitalization costs and recurrent wheezing management annual costs. A discount rate of 3.0% was applied annually for both costs and health outcomes.ResultsOver 6 years, the base case analysis showed that palivizumab was associated to an increase of 0.0731 QALYs compared to non-prophylaxis. Total costs were estimated in €2,110.71 (palivizumab) and €671.68 (non-prophylaxis) from the National Health System (NHS) perspective, resulting in an incremental cost utility ratio (ICUR) of €19,697.69/QALYs gained (prophylaxis vs non-prophylaxis). Results derived from the risk-factors population subgroups analysed were in line with the total population results. From the societal perspective, the incremental cost associated to palivizumab decreased to an €1,253.14 (ICUR = €17,153.16€/QALYs gained for palivizumab vs non-prophylaxis). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the model.ConclusionsThe prophylaxis with palivizumab is efficient for preventing from RSV infections in preterm infants 32day 1-35day 0 wGA in Spain.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12879-017-2803-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.