Women's quality of life is decreased by acute cystitis and antibiotic adverse effects associated with treatment

Ernst, Erika J.; Ernst, Michael E.; Hoehns, James D.; Bergus, George

doi:10.1186/1477-7525-3-45

Cited by 57 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ernst et al 220 used the Quality of Wellbeing (QWB) to estimate the QoL among 146 American women who were diagnosed with acute cystitis, and the effect of treatment upon QoL. Those with type 2 diabetes were excluded from the study.…”

Section: Ellis and Vermamentioning

confidence: 99%

Canagliflozin, dapagliflozin and empagliflozin monotherapy for treating type 2 diabetes: systematic review and economic evaluation

Johnston

Uthman

Cummins

et al. 2017

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Most people with type 2 diabetes are overweight, so initial treatment is aimed at reducing weight and increasing physical activity. Even modest weight loss can improve control of blood glucose. If drug treatment is necessary, the drug of first choice is metformin. However, some people cannot tolerate metformin, which causes diarrhoea in about 10%, and it cannot be used in people with renal impairment. This review appraises three of the newest class of drugs for monotherapy when metformin cannot be used, the sodium–glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors. Objective To review the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin (Farxiga, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Luton, UK), canagliflozin (Invokana, Janssen, High Wycombe, UK) and empagliflozin (Jardiance, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ingelheim, Germany/Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA), in monotherapy in people who cannot take metformin. Sources MEDLINE (1946 to February 2015) and EMBASE (1974 to February 2015) for randomised controlled trials lasting 24 weeks or more. For adverse events, a wider range of studies was used. Three manufacturers provided submissions. Methods Systematic review and economic evaluation. A network meta-analysis was carried out involving the three SGLT2 inhibitors and key comparators. Critical appraisal of submissions from three manufacturers. Results We included three trials of dapagliflozin and two each for canagliflozin and empagliflozin. The trials were of good quality. The canagliflozin and dapagliflozin trials compared them with placebo, but the two empagliflozin trials included active comparators. All three drugs were shown to be effective in improving glycaemic control, promoting weight loss and lowering blood pressure (BP). Limitations There were no head-to-head trials of the different flozins, and no long-term data on cardiovascular outcomes in this group of patients. Most trials were against placebo. The trials were done in patient groups that were not always comparable, for example in baseline glycated haemoglobin or body mass index. Data on elderly patients were lacking. Conclusions Dapagliflozin, canagliflozin and empagliflozin are effective in improving glycaemic control, with added benefits of some reductions in BP and weight. Adverse effects are urinary and genital tract infections in a small proportion of users. In monotherapy, the three drugs do not appear cost-effective compared with gliclazide or pioglitazone, but may be competitive against sitagliptin (Januvia, Merck Sharp & Dohme Limited, Kenilworth, NJ, USA). Funding The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

show abstract

Section: Ellis and Vermamentioning

confidence: 99%

Canagliflozin, dapagliflozin and empagliflozin monotherapy for treating type 2 diabetes: systematic review and economic evaluation

Johnston

Uthman

Cummins

et al. 2017

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The underlying mechanism for the association between ADEs and QOL is not fully understood yet. Although, an increase in the experience of ADEs may be associated with a decrease in QOL [ 11 , 12 ], it has also been shown that baseline QOL scores were lower for patients who report an ADE at follow-up than for patients who do not report an ADE at follow-up [ 34 ]. This finding may imply that patients with a low QOL have a higher risk of experiencing ADEs [ 35 ], or that patients with negative health perceptions or certain personality traits are more disposed to experiencing and/or reporting ADEs [ 13 , 36 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Construct and concurrent validity of a patient-reported adverse drug event questionnaire: a cross-sectional study

Vries

Haaijer‐Ruskamp

Zeeuw

et al. 2014

Health Qual Life Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDirect patient-reported information about adverse drug events (ADEs) is important since it adds to healthcare professional-reported information about the safety of drugs. Previously, we developed an instrument to assess patient-reported ADEs in research settings. The aim of this study is to assess the construct and concurrent validity of the questionnaire.MethodsPatients on at least an oral glucose-lowering drug completed the ADE questionnaire, the World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF, and the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM). The ADE questionnaire assesses ADEs for any drug that the patient uses. Construct validity was assessed by testing whether patients reporting an ADE had a lower general quality of life and physical health than those not reporting an ADE, using Mann–Whitney U-tests and t-tests (significance level <0.05). For concurrent validity, we tested whether ADEs that patients associate with particular drugs in the ADE questionnaire are documented in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) of those drugs, and whether patients who report an ADE with the use of metformin on the TSQM, mention metformin as a drug associated with an ADE on the ADE questionnaire. Agreement of 70% with the SPC was considered satisfactory. Sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) were calculated for the comparison with the TSQM, where 70% was used as the cut-off level for sufficient concurrent validity.ResultsWe included 135 patients (mean age 64 years, 35% women). Patients who reported an ADE (N = 37) had a lower general quality of life and physical health than those not reporting an ADE (P < 0.05). For 78 of the 146 reported ADEs (53%), patients mentioned at least 1 particular drug associated with the ADE. After clustering related ADEs, this resulted in 56 patient-reported ADE-drug associations. Of these, 41 (73%) were in agreement with information in the SPC. Finally, the questionnaire had a sensitivity of 38% and PPV of 79% for assessing ADEs associated with metformin.ConclusionsThe construct validity of the patient-reported ADE questionnaire was sufficient for reporting any versus no ADE, but the concurrent validity was only partly demonstrated. Therefore, the questionnaire needs to be adapted before it can be used.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12955-014-0103-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…Therefore, we used proxies from diabetic foot infection, dermatologic disease, and other infections to estimate utility values 38–40. Utilities included in the current model were MRSA infection (0.44),40 treatment success (1, assumption), treatment failure (0.93),39 and drug discontinuation due to an adverse event (0.93) 38. If a patient suffered from multiple health events at the same time, the corresponding utility values were calculated using the multiplicative method.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic burden of inpatient and outpatient antibiotic treatment for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus complicated skin and soft-tissue infections: a comparison of linezolid, vancomycin, and daptomycin

Stephens¹,

Gào²,

Patel³

et al. 2013

CEOR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPrevious economic analyses evaluating treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) complicated skin and soft-tissue infections (cSSTI) failed to include all direct treatment costs such as outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT). Our objective was to develop an economic model from a US payer perspective that includes all direct inpatient and outpatient costs incurred by patients with MRSA cSSTI receiving linezolid, vancomycin, or daptomycin.MethodsA 4-week decision model was developed for this economic analysis. Published literature and database analyses with validation by experts provided clinical, resource use, and cost inputs on data such as efficacy rate, length of stay, adverse events, and OPAT services. Base-case analysis assumed equal efficacy and equal length of stay for treatments. We conducted several sensitivity analyses where assumptions on resource use or efficacy were varied. Costs were reported in year-end 2011 US dollars.ResultsTotal treatment costs in the base-case were lower for linezolid ($10,571) than vancomycin ($11,096), and daptomycin ($13,612). Inpatient treatment costs were $740 more, but outpatient costs, $1,266 less with linezolid than vancomycin therapy due to a switch to oral linezolid when the patient was discharged. Compared with daptomycin, both inpatient and outpatient treatment costs were lower with linezolid by $87 and $2,954 respectively. In sensitivity analyses, linezolid had lower costs compared with vancomycin and daptomycin when using differential length of stay data from a clinical trial, and using success rates from a meta-analysis. In a scenario without peripherally inserted central catheter line costs, linezolid became slightly more expensive than vancomycin (by $285), but remained less costly than daptomycin (by $2,316).ConclusionOutpatient costs of managing MRSA cSSTI may be reduced by 30%–50% with oral linezolid compared with vancomycin or daptomycin. Results from this analysis support potential economic benefit and cost savings of using linezolid versus traditional OPAT when total inpatient and outpatient medical costs are evaluated.

show abstract

Women's quality of life is decreased by acute cystitis and antibiotic adverse effects associated with treatment

Cited by 57 publications

References 17 publications

Canagliflozin, dapagliflozin and empagliflozin monotherapy for treating type 2 diabetes: systematic review and economic evaluation

Canagliflozin, dapagliflozin and empagliflozin monotherapy for treating type 2 diabetes: systematic review and economic evaluation

Construct and concurrent validity of a patient-reported adverse drug event questionnaire: a cross-sectional study

Economic burden of inpatient and outpatient antibiotic treatment for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus complicated skin and soft-tissue infections: a comparison of linezolid, vancomycin, and daptomycin

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About