No abstract

Background and Purpose-With the ever-increasing pressure on healthcare budgets, we witness a growing demand for evidence of the economic implications of care across many therapeutic areas. Stroke is no exception. Methods-Detailed information on healthcare use was collected in conjunction with two 12-week international trials designed primarily to assess the safety and efficacy of a new potential neuroprotective agent. The information was gathered prospectively by means of a customized resource use instrument that included both acute and long-term inpatient management as well as community care. In this report, the results pertaining to the 1341 acute ischemic stroke patients are described. Results-More than 70% of the mean cost ($13 668) was explained by the initial hospitalization, which averaged 24 days.The total cost and its components varied according to patient age, the presence of comorbidities, and several indicators of disease severity. Pronounced country differences could be observed in the management of this fairly homogeneous patient group. Conclusions-This study provides a comprehensive picture of the healthcare services used for the treatment and rehabilitation of stroke victims, presented with respect to various patient and disease characteristics. It is expected that researchers evaluating the cost-efficiency of specific stroke treatments will benefit from the detailed information presented in this report. (Stroke. 2000;31:582-590.)

No abstract

ObjectivesTo compare outcomes with single tablet regimens (STR) versus multi-tablet regimens (MTR) for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment using published data.DesignSystematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of literature on approved and investigational HIV regimens.MethodsThe research followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Single or un-blinded studies reporting a direct comparison between STR and MTR were eligible for the meta-analysis. Double-blinded studies were excluded due to lack of difference in pill burden between cohorts. The key outcomes of interest included: adherence rates/proportion meeting target, efficacy, safety/tolerability, non-clinical and economic outcomes.ResultsAfter screening 63 full-text articles and posters, 14 studies were eligible for the meta-analysis. The analysis showed that patients taking STR had improved outcomes over those taking MTR. Patients were significantly more adherent regardless of daily dosing frequency (odds ratio [OR]: 1.96, p < 0.001) and were more likely to achieve virological suppression (relative risk [RR]: 1.05, p = 0.002). There was a trend toward a lower discontinuation risk in the STR cohort, together with reported higher therapy satisfaction, better symptom control, improved health status, reduced healthcare resource utilization and demonstrated cost-effectiveness compared to MTR. There were no differences in CD4 cell count increase (at 48 weeks) or safety outcomes.ConclusionsThe findings of this study confirm previously reported preliminary findings of the advantages of STR over MTR for HIV treatment in adherence, therapy continuation, viral suppression, tolerability, quality of life improvement, cost-effectiveness and healthcare resource utilization.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12981-018-0204-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.