A 3 4 7 -A 7 6 6 A403 drugs); monitoring costs (from screening to pregnancy determination, in accordance with the ESTHER protocol); procedure costs (including oocyte retrieval, fertilisation, embryo freezing, and embryo transfer), as well as costs related to ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and OHSS preventive measures. Results: The total average cost per IVF cycle ranges from £5,797 to £5,818 for Follitropin-delta and from £5,809 to £5,836 for Follitropin-alfa with a mean absolute total cost difference from £2 to £26. The cost benefits associated to Follitropin-delta are mainly due to its reduction in the proportion of women needing OHSS prevention (2.36% versus 4.67%) and in its reduction of OHSS incidence (3.46% versus 4.84%). ConClusions: This CMA and the sensitivity analyses performed demonstrate that Follitropin-delta is a cost neutral alternative versus Follitropin-alfa in women undergoing a first fresh IVF cycle in the UK.

Objectives: To assess the cost-effectiveness of Abiraterone Acetate plus Prednisone (A-P) compared with Cabazitaxel plus Prednisone (C-P) in Dominican Republic, in patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) that have failed to chemotherapy with Docetaxel. MethOds: A three-health state cohort simulation Markov Model (progression-free, post-progression and death) was developed based on overall and progression free survival data. The time frame was 10 years. The perspective was that of the Public System of Health of Dominican Republic. The health outcomes of interest were Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and Life Years (LYs). Efficacy data was taken from clinical trials (COU-AA-301 for A-P and TROPIC for C-P). Utilities for health states and negative utilities for adverse events were estimated based on quality of life endpoints of the COU-AA-301 trial. The base year was 2012. All costs are presented in Dominican currency (Dominican Pesos -RD$). Costs and outcomes were discounted at 5%. Probabilistic sensitivity (PSA) analysis was performed to evaluate uncertainty surrounding the parameters. Results: A-P resulted in 0.79 QALYs and 1.35 LYs, per patient, respectively. C-P resulted in 0.71 QALYs and 1.28 LYs, per patient, respectively. Mean total costs per patient were: RD$ 2.204.289 for A-P and RD$ 2.732.365 for C-P. The results of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that, when compared with C-Z, A-P was found dominant (associated with reduced costs and increased QALYs) in the majority of the iterations. A-P had a 75% probability of being cost effective, independent of the willingness to pay, when compared to C-P. cOnclusiOns: A-P can be considered cost-saving (dominant), when compared with C-P, in patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer that have failed to chemotherapy with Docetaxel, from the perspective of the Public System of Health of Dominican Republic.

Objectives: To estimate cost of a sickle cell (SC) crisis, describe setting of care, and type of crisis; and compare costs of sequential crises among adult SC patients. Methods: We used a large US health plan claims database 2 Truven Commercial & Medicare Supplemental. Patients selected had $2 SC claims, presence of SC crisis between 2009-2016 (i.e., SC crisis diagnosis in emergency department [ED] or hospitalization), age $18y at index (i.e., first crisis), 1-year pre-and post-index continuous enrollment, and no crisis during 1-year pre-index period. Healthcare setting, type of crisis, and medical and pharmacy costs during the crisis encounter were measured. Costs of sequential crises were restricted to patients with fee-for-service insurance, adjusted for 2017 inflation, controlled for age, gender and comorbidities, and were compared using gamma models. Results: There were 1,583 patients (1,234 fee-for-service), mean (SD) age 38y ( 14) and 58% female. Mean number of crises during 1-year post-index was 1.9. Average time between crises was 4.2 months. Number of patients with 1+, 2+, 3+ and 4+ crises within 1 year were 1,583 (100%), 679 (43%), 306 (19%) and 160 (10%), respectively. Among these, 52%, 55%, 59% and 61% were hospitalized for the 1st-4th crises (average length of stay: w7 days), and the rest had ED visits. After one crisis, patients tended to have the same setting of care for their next crisis. Across all crises, majority were pain crises (w63%), followed by acute chest syndrome (w11%). Mean (SE) adjusted costs of 1st-4th crises were $12,685

CASP checklists. The success characteristics were extracted from the eligible articles. Results: The search returned with 1833 articles with 944 excluded for duplicates, non-relevance, study design and endpoints, and publication types after initial review. Preliminary result showed that diabetes, cardiology and obesity were the most common target disease areas for digital technology implementation. The most used digital technology were mobile applications, wearables, and web-based intervention, with artificial intelligence is increasingly studied. Publications on industry-sponsored trials, digital technology in clinical trials and as specific treatment companion are limited. The endpoints for outcome measurement and result of digital technology in improving patients' quality of care vary. The success factors for digital technology implementation are quality of care achievement (effective, efficient, accessible/ coverage, and standardized) and positive user experience (usability, acceptability, non-interference and reliability). Conclusions: Digital technology is increasingly used in healthcare settings and showed promising benefits to measure and improve patient outcome. Patients' insights, system standardization and validation are crucial for the success of digital solution. A standardized and robust study design is required to demonstrate the impact of digital technology on patients' quality of care.

Миофасциальная боль является актуальной междисциплинарной медицинской проблемой. Она выявляется более чем у половины пациентов молодого и среднего возраста, точных данных о ее распространенности среди пожилых людей нет. В настоящее время отсутствует систематизированный подход к терминологии и нозологической принадлежности миофасциальной боли. Авторами приводятся и оцениваются значимые факторы возникновения миофасциальной боли и диагностические критерии миофасциального болевого синдрома. В алгоритме лечения делается акцент на общих принципах терапии, механизмах действия и показаниях для обоснованного применения наружных форм НПВП, в частности препарата Вольтарен Эмульгель 12 часов, в качестве как самостоятельного метода лечения при слабой и умеренной боли, так и дополнения к основной терапии, направленной на подавление боли.