Effects of secondary prophylaxis started in adolescent and adult haemophiliacs.
ABSTRACT While primary prophylaxis is a well-established and recommended method of care delivery for children with severe haemophilia, fewer studies have documented the benefits of secondary prophylaxis started in adolescence or adulthood. To evaluate the role of secondary prophylaxis started in adolescent and adult severe haemophiliacs, a retrospective observational cohort study was conducted in 10 Italian Centres that investigated 84 haemophiliacs who had bled frequently and had thus switched from on-demand to prophylactic treatment during adolescence (n = 30) or adulthood (n = 54). The consumption of clotting factor concentrates, the orthopaedic and radiological scores, quality of life and disease-related morbidity were compared before and after starting secondary prophylaxis. Prophylaxis reduced the mean annual number of total and joint bleeds (35.8 vs. 4.2 and 32.4 vs. 3.3; P < 0.01) and of days lost from work/school (34.6 vs. 3.0, P < 0.01). A statistically significant reduction in the orthopaedic score was observed during prophylaxis in adolescents, but not in the whole cohort. Patients used more factor concentrates with corresponding higher costs on prophylaxis, but experienced a better quality of life. With respect to on-demand treatment, higher factor consumption and cost of secondary prophylaxis were balanced by marked clinical benefits and greater well-being in this cohort of adolescent/adult haemophiliacs.
- Thrombosis and Haemostasis 11/2006; 96(4):542-3. · 6.09 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In the last years, the availability in Italy of technologically advanced products for replacement therapy has produced significant changes in the management of haemophilia and of hereditary bleeding disorders in general. With the aim of a uniform approach to treatment, the Italian Association of Haemophilia Centres express in these guidelines a consensus on therapeutic strategies designed to ensure the highest degree of safety and efficacy for the treatment of inherited coagulopathies. The guidelines provide specific recommendations for the choice of the product according to updated scientific evidence, and advice on optimal dosages for the treatment of rare bleeding disorders. The system for haemophilia care and funding in Italy is briefly described.Haemophilia 02/2000; 6(1):1-10. · 3.17 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The need for clearly reported studies evaluating the cost of prophylaxis and its overall outcomes has been recommended from previous literature. To establish minimal ''core standards'' that can be followed when conducting and reporting economic evaluations of hemophilia prophylaxis. Ten members of the IPSG Economic Analysis Working Group participated in a consensus process using the Nominal Groups Technique (NGT). The following topics relating to the economic analysis of prophylaxis studies were addressed; Whose perspective should be taken? Which is the best methodological approach? Is micro- or macro-costing the best costing strategy? What information must be presented about costs and outcomes in order to facilitate local and international interpretation? The group suggests studies on the economic impact of prophylaxis should be viewed from a societal perspective and be reported using a Cost Utility Analysis (CUA) (with consideration of also reporting Cost Benefit Analysis [CBA]). All costs that exceed $500 should be used to measure the costs of prophylaxis (macro strategy) including items such as clotting factor costs, hospitalizations, surgical procedures, productivity loss and number of days lost from school or work. Generic and disease specific quality of lífe and utility measures should be used to report the outcomes of the study. The IPSG has suggested minimal core standards to be applied to the reporting of economic evaluations of hemophilia prophylaxis. Standardized reporting will facilitate the comparison of studies and will allow for more rational policy decisions and treatment choices.Haemophilia 02/2008; 14(1):127-32. · 3.17 Impact Factor