There is evidence that palivizumab prophylaxis is effective in reducing the frequency of hospitalisations due to RSV infection, i.e. in reducing the incidence of serious lower respiratory tract RSV disease in children with chronic lung disease, congenital heart disease or those born preterm.Results from economic evaluations of palivizumab prophylaxis are inconsistent, implying that economic findings must be interpreted with caution. ICER values varied considerably across studies, from highly cost-effective to not cost-effective. The availability of low-cost palivizumab would reduce its inequitable distribution, so that RSV prophylaxis would be available to the poorest countries where children are at greatest risk.

Background Community pharmacists can play an important role in optimizing warfarin treatment, which is very important in vulnerable patient groups such as the elderly patients in rural areas. Objective To evaluate the impact of a community pharmacist's interventions on the quality of anticoagulation in elderly rural patients receiving warfarin. Setting A community pharmacy in Donji Miholjac in Croatia's province of Slavonia. Method We conducted a prospective randomized trial. Eligible patients were recruited at the pharmacy and randomized into two groups. All participants were followed up monthly for a period of 6 months. Repeated education and a follow up plan were provided to the participants in the intervention group, and their general practitioners were contacted to correct the warfarin dose or to avoid drug interactions. Main outcome measure Time in therapeutic range (TTR) calculated by the Rosendaal method. Results A total of 140 patients were randomized and 131 patients finished the study, 65 patients in the intervention group. Median age was 73 years. At the end of the follow-up period, the median TTR was significantly higher in the intervention group (93 vs. 31.2% for intervention and control, respectively; P < 0.001). The proportion of patients with TTR ≥ 65% was also significantly higher in the intervention group (86.2 vs. 7.6% for intervention and control, respectively; P < 0.001). Factors independently associated with TTR ≥ 65% were intervention (P < 0.001), less frequent dose change (P = 0.005), better adherence (P < 0.001) and less variable vitamin K intake (P = 0.010).

Topical use of either tranexamic acid or aprotinin efficiently reduces postoperative bleeding. TA seems to be at least as potent as aprotinin, but potentially safer and with better cost-effectiveness ratio.

No abstract

Background Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is one of the most important viral pathogens causing acute respiratory infections, resulting in about 3.4 million hospitalisations annually in children under five. Palivizumab is the only product approved for prevention of serious RSV disease, as motavizumab is no longer being developed for this condition. The efficacy and safety of palivizumab has been evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and a large number of economic evaluations (EEs) have tested its cost‐effectiveness. Objectives To assess the effectiveness and safety of palivizumab prophylaxis in reducing the risk of complications (hospitalization due to RSV infection) in high‐risk infants and children. To assess the cost‐effectiveness (or cost‐utility) of palivizumab prophylaxis in infants and children in different risk groups. Search methods We searched CENTRAL (2012, Issue 7), MEDLINE (1996 to July week 4, 2012), EMBASE (1996 to August 2012), CINAHL (1996 to August 2012) and LILACS (1996 to August 2012) for RCTs. We searched the NHS Economic Evaluations Database (NHS EED 2012, Issue 4), Health Economics Evaluations Database (HEED, 9 August 2012), Paediatric Economic Database Evaluations (PEDE, 1980 to 2009), MEDLINE (1996 to July week 4, 2012) and EMBASE (1996 to August 2012) for EEs. Selection criteria We included RCTs comparing palivizumab prophylaxis with a placebo or another type of prophylaxis in preventing serious lower respiratory tract disease caused by RSV in paediatric patients at high risk. We included cost‐effectiveness analyses and cost‐utility analyses comparing palivizumab prophylaxis with no prophylaxis. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias for the included studies and extracted data for both the RCTs and EEs. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) and their associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes and for adverse events (AEs). For continuous outcomes, we provided a narrative summary of results due to missing data on standard deviations. We performed fixed‐effect meta‐analyses for the estimation of pooled effects whenever there was no indication of heterogeneity between included RCTs. We summarised the results reported in included EEs, such as incremental costs, incremental effectiveness, and incremental cost‐effectiveness and/or cost‐utility ratios (ICERs), and we calculated ICER present values in 2011 Euros for all studies. Main results Of the seven available RCTs, three compared palivizumab with a placebo in a total of 2831 patients, and four compared palivizumab with motavizumab in a total of 8265 patients. All RCTs were sponsored by the drug manufacturing company. The overall quality of RCTs was good, but most of the outcomes assessed relied on data from only two studies. Palivizumab prophylaxis was associated with a statistically significant reduction in RSV hospitalisations (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.64) and a statistically non‐significant reduction in all‐cause mortality (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.15) ...