http://test-journals.seedmedicalpublishers.com/index.php/FE/issue/feed Farmeconomia. Health economics and therapeutic pathways 2019-04-16T09:00:05+00:00 Ombretta Bandi o.bandi@seedstm.com Open Journal Systems <p>eISSN: 2240-256X<br />h5-index:7<br /><br /></p><p><em>Farmeconomia. Health Economics and Therapeutic Pathways</em> publishes original researches and reviews in pharmacoeconomics and health economics. It is indexed in:</p><ul><li><a href="http://search.crossref.org/?q=farmeconomia&amp;publication=Farmeconomia.+Health+economics+and+therapeutic+pathways" target="_blank">CrossRef</a></li><li><a href="https://doaj.org/" target="_blank">DOAJ</a> – Directory of Open Access Journals</li><li><a href="http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/multidisciplinary/esci/" target="_blank">Emerging Sources Citation Index</a> (ESCI)</li><li><a href="https://scholar.google.it/scholar?as_ylo=2012&amp;q=farmeconomia&amp;hl=it&amp;as_sdt=0,5" target="_blank">GoogleScholar<br /></a></li><li><a href="https://www.openaire.eu/search/dataprovider?datasourceId=seedsjournal::3ee65559e8c6252c5009998a54d88136" target="_blank">OpenAIRE</a></li><li><a href="http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/search.php?id=1024" target="_blank">SHERPA/RoMEO</a></li></ul><p>The aim is to provide contents of the highest quality, authority and accessibility. Emphasis is placed on evaluation of new drugs and pharmacoeconomics models, but the journal also publishes economic analysis of all types of healthcare interventions and of health policy initiatives, evaluation of methodologies, and analysis of pricing and reimbursement systems. Readership includes health economists, market access experts, and in general everyone who has an interest in pharmacoeconomics, health economics, health policy, and public health.<br />Contents are subject to double-blind <a href="/index.php/FE/about/editorialPolicies#peerReviewProcess" target="_blank">peer review process</a> and are editorially independent. <br /><em>Farmeconomia. Health Economics and Therapeutic Pathways</em> is an <a href="/index.php/FE/about/editorialPolicies#custom-0">open access</a> journal that provides immediate open access to all of its articles (both HTML and PDF versions) on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.</p> http://test-journals.seedmedicalpublishers.com/index.php/FE/article/view/1374 Economic Evaluation of Different Organizational Models for the Management of Patients with Hepatitis C 2019-03-26T16:26:15+00:00 Stefano Fagiuoli sfagiuoli@asst-pg23.it Luisa Pasulo lpasulo@asst-pg23.it Franco Maggiolo fmaggiolo@asst-pg23.it Rosaria Spinella cbenedetti@tefen.com Paolo Del Poggio cbenedetti@tefen.com Roberto Boldizzoni cbenedetti@tefen.com Mariella Di Marco cbenedetti@tefen.com Alessandro Aronica cbenedetti@tefen.com Chiara Benedetti cbenedetti@T8pconsulting.com Paolo Correale pcorreale@T8pconsulting.com Chiara Garavaglia cgaravaglia@T8pconsulting.com Carlo Nicora cnicora@T8pconsulting.com <p class="abstract">BACKGROUND: Access to Directly Acting Antivirals (DAAs) for Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) treatment in Italy was initially restricted to severe patients. In 2017, AIFA expanded access to all patients, to achieve elimination by 2030.</p><p class="abstract">AIM: To investigate the impact of different hospitals’ organizational models on elimination timing, treatment capacity and direct costs.</p><p class="abstract">METHODS: Most Regional healthcare systems in Italy deploy a Center of Excellence (CoE) organizational model, where patients are referred to a single major hospital in the area, which is the only one that can prescribe and deliver DAAs. The study was conducted at Bergamo’s (Lombardy, Italy) Papa Giovanni XXIII hospital (PG-23), which deploys a Hub&amp;Spoke model: the Hub (PG-23) prescribes and delivers DAAs while Spokes (four smaller hospitals) can only prescribe them. The study compares the two models (CoE vs. H&amp;S). Patient journey and workloads were mapped and quantified through interviews with hospital stakeholders. Cost data were collected through the hospital’s IT system; the sample comprised 2,277 HCV patients, over one year.</p><p class="abstract">RESULTS: The study calculated the average cost to treat HCV patients (~ € 1,470 per patient). Key cost drivers are lab tests (60%) and specialist visits (30%). Over one year, H&amp;S can treat 68% more patients than CoE. As deferred patients absorb up to 40% of total costs, the “Optimized” model was designed by streamlining specialists’ visits and involving general practitioners during follow-up. “Optimized” model increases treatment capacity and reduces costs of deferred patients by 72% vs CoE.</p><p class="abstract">CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates the importance of organizational models in efficiently achieving 2030 elimination.</p> 2019-01-28T09:48:41+00:00 Copyright (c) 2019 Stefano Fagiuoli, Luisa Pasulo, Franco Maggiolo, Rosaria Spinella, Paolo Del Poggio, Roberto Boldizzoni, Mariella Di Marco, Alessandro Aronica, Chiara Benedetti, Paolo Correale, Chiara Garavaglia, Carlo Nicora http://test-journals.seedmedicalpublishers.com/index.php/FE/article/view/1406 Erratum: Effectiveness of Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics in Schizophrenia: A Literature Review and Bayesian Meta-Analysis Informing Economic Considerations 2019-03-26T16:25:29+00:00 [No authors listed] o.bandi@seedmedicalpublishers.com <p>There was an error in the relapse rate reduction reported in Figure 2 in this article by Zaniolo et al. [<em>Farmeconomia. Health economics and therapeutic pathways</em> 2019; 20: 13-24; <a href="https://doi.org/10.7175/fe.v20i1.1393">https://doi.org/10.7175/fe.v20i1.1393</a>]. The online version has been corrected on 13 February 2019.</p> 2019-02-13T10:55:59+00:00 Copyright (c) 2019 No authors listed http://test-journals.seedmedicalpublishers.com/index.php/FE/article/view/1410 Prova Provetta7 2019-04-16T08:23:29+00:00 Mario Pinotti k.autore@aut.it <p>dgcdfgi</p> 2019-04-16T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) 2019 Gino Panino http://test-journals.seedmedicalpublishers.com/index.php/FE/article/view/1393 Effectiveness of Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics in Schizophrenia: A Literature Review and Bayesian Meta-Analysis Informing Economic Considerations 2019-04-16T09:00:05+00:00 Orietta Zaniolo o.zaniolo@adreshe.com Gianni Ghetti g.ghetti@adreshe.com Massimiliano Povero m.povero@adreshe.com Lorenzo Pradelli l.pradelli@adreshe.com <p class="abstract">BACKGROUND: Although the use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) is considered an important option in the management of schizophrenia two recent meta-analysis, which aimed to compare LAIs vs oral antipsychotics (OAPs) in terms of relapse rate, showed discordant results.</p> <p class="abstract">AIM: To investigate factors affecting the efficacy of antipsychotics in terms of relapse prevention in the real-world and to estimate the management cost of an episode of relapse.</p> <p class="abstract">METHODS: We conducted a literature search using MEDLINE/PubMed with the aim to extract efficacy, effectiveness and adherence data of LAIs and OAPs. The primary outcome was the relative risk (RR) of relapse between two strategies. The extracted RR were included in a series of Bayesian statistical models based on the starting hypotheses. The RR rates obtained from the meta-analysis have been used as input for an economic evaluation of the total costs associated with the management of the patient with schizophrenia from the Italian NHS perspective.</p> <p class="abstract">RESULTS: The literature search identified 34 studies which met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. According to the model that best explains the data, in the real-world setting the effectiveness with LAIs is greater than with OAPs, with a more pronounced effect for SGAs than for FGAs. Taking into account generation, route and frequency of administration, the RR decreased with lower administration frequency, with SGA LAI administered once every 90 days which is associated with the greatest reduction in the risk of relapse (-85%). When the results of the meta-analysis are used to feed an economic evaluation the results show that the SGA administered every 90 days is the strategy with the least expected cumulative cost both at 1 (€ 3,509) and 5 years (€ 19,690).</p> <p class="abstract">CONCLUSION: SGA LAIs administered every 90 days seems to be the best option for the treatment of patient with schizophrenia from both the clinical and economic perspectives.</p> <p class="abstract"><span class="st">&nbsp;</span></p> <p class="abstract"><span class="st">An erratum to this article is available online at:&nbsp;<a href="https://doi.org/10.7175/fe.v20i1.1406" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://doi.org/10.7175/fe.v20i1.1406</a></span></p> 2019-02-13T10:54:20+00:00 Copyright (c) 2019 Orietta Zaniolo, Lorenzo Pradelli