Fraga-Fuentes, M.D. (M.D.)
- Publications
- item.page.relationships.isContributorAdvisorOfPublication
- item.page.relationships.isContributorOfPublication
3 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- Comparaciones indirectas en los informes de evaluación de medicamentos en la web del grupo GENESIS de la SEFH(Elsevier, 2012) Ortega-Eslava, A. (Ana); Puigventos, F. (Francesc); Clopes-Estela, A. (A.); Fraga-Fuentes, M.D. (M.D.); Santos-Ramos, B. (B.); Vilanova-Bolto, M. (M.)An active comparator was present in 95% of the 337 analysed reports; 50% included a direct comparative study vs comparator. In 114 reports (34%), an IC was used; 69% of the ICs were made by the report author. Most ICs were narrative and none were adjusted. An IC could have been made in an additional 16% of the cases and possibly in 24% more. Conclusions: Most evaluated drugs have an active comparator but studies comparing them directly are not as common. ICs could be included in more reports along with quality control criteria. © 2011 SEFH. Published
- Economic evaluation in collaborative hospital drug evaluation reports(Aula Médica Ediciones, 2015) Marin-Gil, R. (Roberto); Ortega-Eslava, A. (Ana); Puigventos, F. (Francesc); Lopez-Briz, E. (Eduardo); Fraga-Fuentes, M.D. (M.D.); Dranitsaris, G. (George)Abstract Objective: economic evaluation is a fundamental criterion when deciding a drug’s place in therapy. The MADRE method (Method for Assistance in making Decisions and Writing Drug Evaluation Reports) is widely used for drug evaluation. This method was developed by the GENESIS group of the Spanish Society of Hospital Pharmacy (SEFH), including economic evaluation. We intend to improve the economic aspects of this method. As for the direction to take, we have to first analyze our previous experiences with the current methodology and propose necessary improvements. Method: economic evaluation sections in collaboratively conducted drug evaluation reports (as the scientific society, SEFH) with the MADRE method were reviewed retrospectively. Results: thirty-two reports were reviewed, 87.5% of them included an economic evaluation conducted by authors and 65.6% contained published economic evaluations. In 90.6% of the reports, a Budget impact analysis was conducted. The cost per life year gained or per Quality Adjusted Life Year gained was present in 14 reports. Twenty-three reports received public comments regarding the need to improve the economic aspect. Main difficulties: low quality evidence in the target population, no comparative studies with a relevant comparator, non-final outcomes evaluated, no quality of life data, no fixed drug price available, dosing uncertainty, and different prices for the same drug. Conclusions: proposed improvements: incorporating different forms of aid for non-drug costs, survival estimation and adapting published economic evaluations; establishing criteria for drug price selection, decision-making in conditions of uncertainty and poor quality evidence, dose calculation and cost-effectiveness thresholds depending on different situations
- Comparaciones indirectas(Elsevier, 2012) Ortega-Eslava, A. (Ana); Fraga-Fuentes, M.D. (M.D.); Ventayol-Bosch, P. (P.); Alegre-del-Rey, E.J. (E.J.)