Descriptors
Documents disponibles dans cette catégorie (19)
Add the result to your basket Make a suggestion Refine your search Apply to external sourcesExtend search on down-posting(s)
, Author . - 2010 . - A249.
Languages : English (eng)
in Value in Health > 13(2010)7 [11/01/2010] . - A249
Descriptors: Classification
W 1 Serials. Periodicals
Indexation
2009-19 ; Belgium ; Decision Making ; Drug Costs ; Economics ; France ; Journal Article ; Peer Review ; Pharmacology ; Policy ; R147 ; Reimbursement Mechanisms ; SwedenAbstract: OBJECTIVES: Many countries are adapting their pharmaceutical reimbursement system, increasingly emphasizing the role of pharmacoeconomics in decision-making. The aim of our study is to analyze European regulatory systems to obtain insight into best practice systems that deliver value for money. METHODS: The analytical Hutton Framework was used for comparing and assessing “fourth hurdle” drug reimbursement systems in the The Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, and France. We investigated policy documents, explored literature, and conducted interviews with policymakers and representatives of the pharmaceutical industry. RESULTS: All systems have a centralized decision body, even though the financial responsibility may be regional (Sweden). Only in Sweden, the minister has no role at the individual reimbursement decision level. None of the systems has a fully independent evaluation process and the impact of the systems is mainly assessed on drug expenditure. All countries make efforts to increase transparency. However, in Sweden manufacturers may withdraw their application before the final reimbursement decision, guaranteeing confidentiality at the cost of less transparency. Policies to deal with uncertainty vary per country: financial risk-sharing agreements by price/volume contracts-France-versus outcomes-based agreements for expensive inpatient drugs-the The Netherlands. The actual value of a drug and disease severity is reflected in the level of reimbursement in France and Belgium, whereas in the The Netherlands and Sweden, enlisted drugs are fully reimbursed. All countries attempt to increase the importance of pharmaco- economics in decision-making. However, no country expresses the relative importance of cost-effectiveness compared to other criteria nor applies a strictly defined threshold. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals that while there is a convergence in scientific evaluation processes, important differences remain between the Dutch, Belgian, Swedish, and French regulatory frameworks. All countries recognize that pharmaco- economics has a place in decision-making on value for money, but for the time being, pharmacoeconomics seems to play a rather undefined role. Link for e-copy: http://doi.org/10.1016/S1098-3015(11)71891-5 Format of e-copy: PDF [Open Archive] Record link: https://kce.docressources.info/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=3740 [article]Démence / Michel Kroes / Brussels [Belgium] : KCE = Federaal Kenniscentrum voor de Gezondheidszorg = Centre Fédéral d'Expertise des Soins de Santé = Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (2011)
ISSN : D/2011/10.273/36 : € 0,00
Etude n° 2010-07
Languages : English (eng) French (fre)
Descriptors: Indexation
2010-07 ; Caregivers ; Dementia ; Nonpharmacological Treatment ; Pharmacology ; R160 ; Therapeutics
Classification
WT 155 Senile dementia. Alzheimer's diseaseAbstract: Les médicaments ne sont pas d’une grande utilité pour la prise en charge de la démence mais y a-t-il des solutions alternatives ? Le Centre fédéral d’expertise des soins de santé (KCE) a analysé trente formes de prise en charge non médicamenteuses. Des données scientifiques montrent l’efficacité de quatre d’entre elles. Le soutien psychologique, social et la formation de l’entourage sont à privilégier à domicile. En institution, la formation du personnel soignant diminue l’usage des moyens de contention. Enfin, l’activité physique et la stimulation des fonctions cognitives exercent un effet positif sur la personne souffrant de démence. Deux conditions pour le succès des ces interventions : un suivi professionnel régulier et un ajustement de l’intervention au patient et à son entourage. Force est de constater que les données scientifiques manquent pour tirer des conclusions relatives aux autres interventions. Contents note: 1 INTRODUCTION 3 -- 1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY 3 -- 1.2 DEMENTIA 3 -- 1.2.1 A disease with consequences 3 -- 1.2.2 Diagnostic process 3 -- 1.2.3 Prevalence of dementia 4 -- 1.2.4 Types of dementia in Europe 4 -- 1.3 RESEARCH QUESTION 5 -- 2 METHODS 6 -- 2.1 INCLUSION CRITERIA 6 -- 2.2 LITERATURE SEARCH STRATEGY 8 -- 2.2.1 Phase I : systematic reviews 8 -- 2.2.2 Phase II : randomised controlled trials 9 -- 2.3 ASSESSING METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY AND RISK OF BIAS 9 -- 2.3.1 Systematic reviews 9 -- 2.3.2 Randomised controlled trials 10 -- 2.4 DATA EXTRACTION 10 -- 3 RESULTS 11 -- 3.1 METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 11 -- 3.1.1 Systematic reviews 11 -- 3.1.2 Randomised controlled trials 13 -- 3.2 RESULTS BY INTERVENTION 16 -- 3.2.1 Cognition 16 -- 3.2.2 Emotion 19 -- 3.2.3 Sensory enhancement 20 -- 3.2.4 Daily activities 23 -- 3.2.5 Physical activity 23 -- 3.2.6 Communication/interaction/relationship interventions 24 -- 3.2.7 Environmental changes 25 -- 3.2.8 Nutrition 26 -- 3.2.9 Interventions primarily focused on caregivers 26 -- 3.2.10 Interventions for the informal caregivers and patients at home 27 -- 4 SUMMARY OF THE MAIN FINDINGS 31 -- 4.1 QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: SUMMARY TABLE 31 -- 4.2 MODERATE QUALITY OF EVIDENCE FOR SIX GROUPS OF INTERVENTIONS 33 -- 4.2.1 Multicomponent psychoeducation/psychosocial interventions : impact on caregivers -- outcomes and on institutionalisation 33 -- 4.2.2 Physical activity 33 -- 4.2.3 Staff education 33 -- 4.2.4 Cognitive stimulation / training 34 -- 4.3 LOW QUALITY OF EVIDENCE FOR SIXTEEN INTERVENTIONS 34 -- 4.4 NO RCT FOR SIX INTERVENTIONS 34 -- 5 DISCUSSION 35 -- 5.1 STRENGTHS OF THE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW 35 -- 5.2 LIMITATIONS IN THE INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS 35 -- 5.3 LACK OF EVIDENCE: SOME HYPOTHESES 35 -- 5.4 RESULTS: APPLICABLE TO ALL PATIENT SUBGROUPS ? 36 -- 5.5 RESULTS APPLICABLE TO ALL SETTINGS ? 36 -- 5.6 INTERVENTIONS TAILORED TO THE PATIENT AND INFORMAL CAREGIVER ARE MORE -- SUCCESSFUL 36 -- 5.7 ADAPTATION TO THE CULTURAL AND HEALTH CARE CONTEXT 37 -- 5.8 PERSPECTIVES 37 -- 5.9 SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 37 -- 6 APPENDICES 38 -- 6.1 APPENDIX 1 MESH TERM : DEMENTIA 38 -- 6.2 APPENDIX 2 SEARCH STRATEGIES SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS 38 -- 6.3 APPENDIX 3. WEBSITES ADDITIONAL HANDSEARCHING 50 -- 6.4 APPENDIX 4 QUALITY APPRAISAL FOR INCLUDED SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS 52 -- 6.5 APPENDIX 5 DATA EXTRACTION TABLE FOR INCLUDED SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS -- (WITH A LOW RISK OF BIAS) 55 -- 6.6 APPENDIX 6 SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS EXCLUDED (HIGH RISK OF BIAS) 65 -- 6.7 APPENDIX 7 RCT SEARCH STRATEGIES 69 -- 6.8 APPENDIX 8 QUALITY APPRAISAL FOR RCTS 77 -- 6.9 APPENDIX 9. DATA EVIDENCE TABLES FOR THE 30 INCLUDED RCTS 95 -- 7 REFERENCES 114 Link for e-copy: https://kce.fgov.be/sites/default/files/page_documents/kce_160b_demence.pdf Format of e-copy: PDF [Open Access] (780 KB) Record link: https://kce.docressources.info/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=2625 Copies
Barcode Call number Media type Location Section Status No copy
ISSN : D/2011/10.273/37 : € 0,00
Study nr 2010-07
Languages : English (eng)
Descriptors: Indexation
2010-07 ; Caregivers ; Dementia ; Nonpharmacological Treatment ; Pharmacology ; R160 ; Therapeutics
Classification
WT 155 Senile dementia. Alzheimer's diseaseContents note: 1 INTRODUCTION 3 -- 1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY 3 -- 1.2 DEMENTIA 3 -- 1.2.1 A disease with consequences 3 -- 1.2.2 Diagnostic process 3 -- 1.2.3 Prevalence of dementia 4 -- 1.2.4 Types of dementia in Europe 4 -- 1.3 RESEARCH QUESTION 5 -- 2 METHODS 6 -- 2.1 INCLUSION CRITERIA 6 -- 2.2 LITERATURE SEARCH STRATEGY 8 -- 2.2.1 Phase I : systematic reviews 8 -- 2.2.2 Phase II : randomised controlled trials 9 -- 2.3 ASSESSING METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY AND RISK OF BIAS 9 -- 2.3.1 Systematic reviews 9 -- 2.3.2 Randomised controlled trials 10 -- 2.4 DATA EXTRACTION 10 -- 3 RESULTS 11 -- 3.1 METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 11 -- 3.1.1 Systematic reviews 11 -- 3.1.2 Randomised controlled trials 13 -- 3.2 RESULTS BY INTERVENTION 16 -- 3.2.1 Cognition 16 -- 3.2.2 Emotion 19 -- 3.2.3 Sensory enhancement 20 -- 3.2.4 Daily activities 23 -- 3.2.5 Physical activity 23 -- 3.2.6 Communication/interaction/relationship interventions 24 -- 3.2.7 Environmental changes 25 -- 3.2.8 Nutrition 26 -- 3.2.9 Interventions primarily focused on caregivers 26 -- 3.2.10 Interventions for the informal caregivers and patients at home 27 -- 4 SUMMARY OF THE MAIN FINDINGS 31 -- 4.1 QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: SUMMARY TABLE 31 -- 4.2 MODERATE QUALITY OF EVIDENCE FOR SIX GROUPS OF INTERVENTIONS 33 -- 4.2.1 Multicomponent psychoeducation/psychosocial interventions : impact on caregivers -- outcomes and on institutionalisation 33 -- 4.2.2 Physical activity 33 -- 4.2.3 Staff education 33 -- 4.2.4 Cognitive stimulation / training 34 -- 4.3 LOW QUALITY OF EVIDENCE FOR SIXTEEN INTERVENTIONS 34 -- 4.4 NO RCT FOR SIX INTERVENTIONS 34 -- 5 DISCUSSION 35 -- 5.1 STRENGTHS OF THE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW 35 -- 5.2 LIMITATIONS IN THE INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS 35 -- 5.3 LACK OF EVIDENCE: SOME HYPOTHESES 35 -- 5.4 RESULTS: APPLICABLE TO ALL PATIENT SUBGROUPS ? 36 -- 5.5 RESULTS APPLICABLE TO ALL SETTINGS ? 36 -- 5.6 INTERVENTIONS TAILORED TO THE PATIENT AND INFORMAL CAREGIVER ARE MORE -- SUCCESSFUL 36 -- 5.7 ADAPTATION TO THE CULTURAL AND HEALTH CARE CONTEXT 37 -- 5.8 PERSPECTIVES 37 -- 5.9 SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 37 -- 6 APPENDICES 38 -- 6.1 APPENDIX 1 MESH TERM : DEMENTIA 38 -- 6.2 APPENDIX 2 SEARCH STRATEGIES SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS 38 -- 6.3 APPENDIX 3. WEBSITES ADDITIONAL HANDSEARCHING 50 -- 6.4 APPENDIX 4 QUALITY APPRAISAL FOR INCLUDED SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS 52 -- 6.5 APPENDIX 5 DATA EXTRACTION TABLE FOR INCLUDED SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS -- (WITH A LOW RISK OF BIAS) 55 -- 6.6 APPENDIX 6 SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS EXCLUDED (HIGH RISK OF BIAS) 65 -- 6.7 APPENDIX 7 RCT SEARCH STRATEGIES 69 -- 6.8 APPENDIX 8 QUALITY APPRAISAL FOR RCTS 77 -- 6.9 APPENDIX 9. DATA EVIDENCE TABLES FOR THE 30 INCLUDED RCTS 95 -- 7 REFERENCES 114 Link for e-copy: https://kce.fgov.be/sites/default/files/page_documents/kce_160c_dementia_0.pdf Format of e-copy: PDF [Open Access] (767 KB) Record link: https://kce.docressources.info/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=2627 Copies
Barcode Call number Media type Location Section Status No copy
ISSN : D/2011/10.273/35 : € 0,00
Studie nr 2010-07
Languages : English (eng) Dutch (nla)
Descriptors: Indexation
2010-07 ; Caregivers ; Dementia ; Nonpharmacological Treatment ; Pharmacology ; R160 ; Therapeutics
Classification
WT 155 Senile dementia. Alzheimer's diseaseAbstract: Bij de behandeling van mensen met dementie zijn geneesmiddelen niet echt van groot nut, maar zijn er alternatieve oplossingen? Het Federaal Kenniscentrum voor de Gezondheidszorg (KCE) onderzocht dertig vormen van aanpak zonder geneesmiddelen. Voor vier van hen vonden de onderzoekers voldoende betrouwbare studies die wijzen op werkzaamheid. Vooral het opleiden en psychosociaal ondersteunen van de mantelzorger blijkt doeltreffend te zijn. Aangepaste opleidingen aan zorgverleners verminderen het gebruik van dwangmaatregelen in instellingen. Lichaamsbeweging en stimulering van de cognitieve functies hebben een positief effect op de demente persoon zelf. Voorwaarde is dat deze behandelingen aangepast zijn aan de demente persoon en zijn omgeving en dat ze regelmatig opgevolgd worden door professionele zorgverleners. Voor de andere interventies waren er onvoldoende wetenschappelijke gegevens om conclusies te kunnen trekken. Contents note: 1 INTRODUCTION 3 -- 1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY 3 -- 1.2 DEMENTIA 3 -- 1.2.1 A disease with consequences 3 -- 1.2.2 Diagnostic process 3 -- 1.2.3 Prevalence of dementia 4 -- 1.2.4 Types of dementia in Europe 4 -- 1.3 RESEARCH QUESTION 5 -- 2 METHODS 6 -- 2.1 INCLUSION CRITERIA 6 -- 2.2 LITERATURE SEARCH STRATEGY 8 -- 2.2.1 Phase I : systematic reviews 8 -- 2.2.2 Phase II : randomised controlled trials 9 -- 2.3 ASSESSING METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY AND RISK OF BIAS 9 -- 2.3.1 Systematic reviews 9 -- 2.3.2 Randomised controlled trials 10 -- 2.4 DATA EXTRACTION 10 -- 3 RESULTS 11 -- 3.1 METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 11 -- 3.1.1 Systematic reviews 11 -- 3.1.2 Randomised controlled trials 13 -- 3.2 RESULTS BY INTERVENTION 16 -- 3.2.1 Cognition 16 -- 3.2.2 Emotion 19 -- 3.2.3 Sensory enhancement 20 -- 3.2.4 Daily activities 23 -- 3.2.5 Physical activity 23 -- 3.2.6 Communication/interaction/relationship interventions 24 -- 3.2.7 Environmental changes 25 -- 3.2.8 Nutrition 26 -- 3.2.9 Interventions primarily focused on caregivers 26 -- 3.2.10 Interventions for the informal caregivers and patients at home 27 -- 4 SUMMARY OF THE MAIN FINDINGS 31 -- 4.1 QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: SUMMARY TABLE 31 -- 4.2 MODERATE QUALITY OF EVIDENCE FOR SIX GROUPS OF INTERVENTIONS 33 -- 4.2.1 Multicomponent psychoeducation/psychosocial interventions : impact on caregivers -- outcomes and on institutionalisation 33 -- 4.2.2 Physical activity 33 -- 4.2.3 Staff education 33 -- 4.2.4 Cognitive stimulation / training 34 -- 4.3 LOW QUALITY OF EVIDENCE FOR SIXTEEN INTERVENTIONS 34 -- 4.4 NO RCT FOR SIX INTERVENTIONS 34 -- 5 DISCUSSION 35 -- 5.1 STRENGTHS OF THE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW 35 -- 5.2 LIMITATIONS IN THE INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS 35 -- 5.3 LACK OF EVIDENCE: SOME HYPOTHESES 35 -- 5.4 RESULTS: APPLICABLE TO ALL PATIENT SUBGROUPS ? 36 -- 5.5 RESULTS APPLICABLE TO ALL SETTINGS ? 36 -- 5.6 INTERVENTIONS TAILORED TO THE PATIENT AND INFORMAL CAREGIVER ARE MORE -- SUCCESSFUL 36 -- 5.7 ADAPTATION TO THE CULTURAL AND HEALTH CARE CONTEXT 37 -- 5.8 PERSPECTIVES 37 -- 5.9 SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 37 -- 6 APPENDICES 38 -- 6.1 APPENDIX 1 MESH TERM : DEMENTIA 38 -- 6.2 APPENDIX 2 SEARCH STRATEGIES SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS 38 -- 6.3 APPENDIX 3. WEBSITES ADDITIONAL HANDSEARCHING 50 -- 6.4 APPENDIX 4 QUALITY APPRAISAL FOR INCLUDED SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS 52 -- 6.5 APPENDIX 5 DATA EXTRACTION TABLE FOR INCLUDED SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS -- (WITH A LOW RISK OF BIAS) 55 -- 6.6 APPENDIX 6 SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS EXCLUDED (HIGH RISK OF BIAS) 65 -- 6.7 APPENDIX 7 RCT SEARCH STRATEGIES 69 -- 6.8 APPENDIX 8 QUALITY APPRAISAL FOR RCTS 77 -- 6.9 APPENDIX 9. DATA EVIDENCE TABLES FOR THE 30 INCLUDED RCTS 95 -- 7 REFERENCES 114 Link for e-copy: https://kce.fgov.be/sites/default/files/page_documents/kce_160a_dementie.pdf Format of e-copy: PDF [Open Access] (785 KB) Record link: https://kce.docressources.info/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=2626 Copies
Barcode Call number Media type Location Section Status No copy
€ 0,00
DIA 22nd Annual EuroMeeting : Advance programme ; Grimaldi Forum (Monaco) ; March 8-10, 2010
Languages : English (eng)
Descriptors: Classification
QV 4 Pharmacology - General works
Indexation
Congresses ; Patients ; Pharmacology ; Risk Management ; Societies, Scientific ; Technology Assessment, BiomedicalLink for e-copy: http://www.diahome.org/diahome/FlagshipMeetings/home.aspx?meetingid=20292 Record link: https://kce.docressources.info/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=2010 Hold
Place a hold on this item
Copies (1)
Barcode Call number Media type Location Section Status 10273-02009 QV 4 / DIA Book KCE Library (10.124) Available Embase.com / London : Elsevier (1974 (1966))
Permalink
Permalink
PermalinkPermalink
PermalinkInternational journal of clinical pharmacy / J. W.F. Van Mil / Dordrecht [Netherlands] : springer (2011)
Permalink
PermalinkPermalinkPermalinkPermalink
