Search

RESUMO O glaucoma é a principal causa de cegueira irreversível no Brasil. Sua prevalência e incidência tendem a aumentar significativamente no futuro, principalmente devido ao aumento da população e ao seu envelhecimento. A escassez de recursos para a saúde associada ao aumento da disponibilidade e dos custos das tecnologias em saúde exige uma análise parametrizada destas tecnologias e uma alocação eficiente dos recursos. Os estudos de custo-efetividade e custo-utilidade são importantes, pois permitem uma comparação entre diferentes alternativas tanto em termos de seus custos quanto de seus resultados. Para isto, modelos matemáticos (como modelagem de Markov) são comumente utilizados como método de análise. Existem na literatura muitas evidências de custoefetividade e custo-utilidade no glaucoma, inclusive no Brasil. Este artigo se propõe a revisar de maneira prática os conceitos de avaliação econômica em saúde, os tipos de estudos econômicos em saúde, bem como os resultados dos estudos de custo-efetividade e custo-utilidade na área de glaucoma na literatura. ABSTRACT Glaucoma is the leading cause of irreversible blindness in Brazil. Its prevalence and incidence tend to increase significantly in the future, mainly due to the population increase and aging. The scarcity of health care resources and the increasing costs in health require a balanced analysis of health interventions and an efficient allocation of resources. The cost-effectiveness and cost-utility studies are important because they allow a comparison between different alternatives in terms of both their costs and their results. For this purpose, mathematical modeling (such as Markov modeling) is commonly used as the analytical method. The literature, including in Brazil, has plenty of evidence of cost-effectiveness and cost-utility in glaucoma. This article aims to review in a practical way the concepts of economic evaluation in health, describe the different types of health economic studies, as well as the results of cost-effectiveness and cost-utility studies in glaucoma in the literature.

Background The German statutory health insurance (GKV) reimburses all health care services that are deemed sufficient, appropriate, and efficient. According to the German Medical Association (BÄK), individual health services (IGeL) are services that are not under liability of the GKV, medically necessary or recommendable or at least justifiable. They have to be explicitly requested by the patient and have to be paid out of pocket. Research questions The following questions regarding IGeL in the outpatient health care of GKV insurants are addressed in the present report: What is the empirical evidence regarding offers, utilization, practice, acceptance, and the relation between physician and patient, as well as the economic relevance of IGeL? What ethical, social, and legal aspects are related to IGeL? For two of the most common IGeL, the screening for glaucoma and the screening for ovarian and endometrial cancer by vaginal ultrasound (VUS), the following questions are addressed: What is the evidence for the clinical effectiveness? Are there sub-populations for whom screening might be beneficial? Methods The evaluation is divided into two parts. For the first part a systematic literature review of primary studies and publications concerning ethical, social and legal aspects is performed. In the second part, rapid assessments of the clinical effectiveness for the two examples, glaucoma and VUS screening, are prepared. Therefore, in a first step, HTA-reports and systematic reviews are searched, followed by a search for original studies published after the end of the research period of the most recent HTA-report included. Results 29 studies were included for the first question. Between 19 and 53% of GKV members receive IGeL offers, of which three-quarters are realised. 16 to 19% of the insurants ask actively for IGeL. Intraocular tension measurement is the most common single IGeL service, accounting for up to 40% of the offers. It is followed by ultrasound assessments with up to 25% of the offers. Cancer screening and blood or laboratory services are also frequent and represent a major proportion of the demand. The ethical, social, and legal aspects discussed in the context of IGeL concern eight subject areas: autonomous patient decisions versus obtrusion, commercialization of medicine, duty of patient information, benefit, evidence, and (quality) control, role and relation of physicians and patients, relation to the GKV, social inequality, formally correct performance. For glaucoma screening, no randomized controlled trial (RCT) is identified that shows a patient relevant benefit. For VUS three RCT are included. However, they do not yet present mortality data concerning screened and non-screened persons. VUS screening shows a high degree of over-diagnosis in turn leading to invasive interventions. To diagnose one invasive carcinoma, 30 to 35 surgical procedures are necessary. Conclusion IGeL are a relevant factor in the German statutory health care system. To provide more transparency, the requests for evidence-based and independent patient information should be considered. Whether official positive and negative-lists could be an appropriate instrument to give guidance to patients and physicians, should be examined. Generally, IGeL must be seen in the broader context of the discussions about the future design and development of the German health care system., GMS Health Technology Assessment; 7:Doc05; ISSN 1861-8863

OBJETIVO: Avaliar o custo ao final de 5 anos, a efetividade e a relação custo-efetividade das associações fixas de prostaglandina ou prostamida com timolol 0,5% para o tratamento do glaucoma e da hipertensão ocular no Estado de Minas Gerais, Brasil. MÉTODOS: Este estudo transversal avaliou as seguintes associações fixas: bimatoprosta/timolol 0,5% (BT), latanoprosta/timolol 0,5% (LT) e travoprosta/timolol 0,5% (TT). O custo foi calculado a partir do número médio de gotas de 5 frascos de cada associação, da duração (dias) e do preço máximo ao consumidor (PMC). A efetividade na redução da pressão intraocular (PIO) foi obtida na literatura. Para cada uma das associações, calculou-se o custo diário, mensal, anual e em 5 anos. A relação custo-efetividade foi definida como o custo em 5 anos de cada percentual de redução da PIO. RESULTADOS: O PMC, número médio de gotas por frasco e a duração média (dias) foram, respectivamente: R$ 83,07; 109,4 e 54,7 para BT; R$ 126,03; 97,0 e 48,5 para LT e R$ 97,47; 96 e 48,0 para TT. A capacidade de redução percentual da PIO encontrada na literatura foi 35,10% para BT, 35,00% para LT e 34,70% para TT. O custo em 5 anos para cada percentual de redução da PIO foi de R$ 61,02 para BT, R$ 104,71 para LT e R$ 82,53 para TT. A associação BT é dominante sobre as demais. CONCLUSÕES: BT apresentou em 5 anos menor custo e maior efetividade que LT e TT. PURPOSE:To assess the 5-year cost, effectiveness and costeffectiveness of fixed combinations of prostaglandin or prostamide and timolol 0. 5% on glaucoma and/or ocular hypertension in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. METHODS: This cross-sectional study evaluated the following fixed combinations: bimatoprost/timolol 0. 5% (BT), latanoprost/timolol 0. 5% (LT) and travoprost/ timolol 0. 5% (TT). Cost was obtained through mean number of drops in a sample of 5 containers of each medication, duration (days) and the average wholesale price (AWP). Effectiveness in reducing intraocular pressure IOP was derived from the literature. Daily, monthly, annually and 5-year cost was calculated. Costeffectiveness was defined as cost by each percentage of IOP reduction over 5 years. RESULTS: AWP, mean number of drops and mean duration (days) were: R$ 83. 07; 109. 4 and 54. 7 for BT; R$ 126. 03; 97. 0 and 48. 5 for LT and R$ 97. 47; 96. 0 and 48. 0 for TT. Mean percentage of IOP reduction, obtained from literature, was: 35. 10% for BT, 35. 00% for LT and 34. 70% for TT. Cost-effetiveness ratio (R$/%) was: 61. 02 for BT, 104. 71 for LT and 82. 53 for TT. BT was dominant over LT and TT. CONCLUSION: BT presented lower costs and better effectiveness when compared to LT and TT. The most cost-effective fixed combination was BT.