GMS health technology assessment
-
There is a variety of medical and non-medical therapies in practice, which were not evaluated regarding its effectiveness by any systematic evidence oriented investigation. A number of therapies of medical and non-medical type try to treat the different types of tinnitus. The evidence in the scientific literature also had to be cleared in the field of diagnosis and classification as well as medical/psychiatric/psychological procedures of existing medical therapy. ⋯ The innumerable therapeutic approaches, seeming completely incoherent to their effects should be coordinated on the meaningfulness, on the success parameters and with patient safety in light of the most plausible explanation models for non-specific chronic Tinnitus. To this the facilities of competence centres or related science- directing facilities are recommendable. Examinations which are carried out also with small numbers show often methodical insufficiencies. It is necessary that minimal requirements on a scientifically clinical experiment, such as design, case number calculation, analytic statistics, control group, are fulfilled. It is recommendable, that further research has to be promoted regarding tinnitus causes that a coordinated evidence-orientated treatment will be developed.
-
The condition of non-specific back pain is characterized by high prevalence, non satisfactory therapeutic options and severe socioeconomic consequences. Therefore prevention seems an attractive option to downsize the problem. However, the construction of effective preventive measures is complicated by the obscure aetiology of the condition, the multidimensionality of risk and prognostic factors (bio psychosocial model!) and the variability of its natural as well as clinical course. This led to the development of a wide variety of preventive measures: e. g. exercise programs, educational measures (including back school), ergonomic modification of the work environment, mechanical supports (e. g. back belts) as well as multidisciplinary interventions. For two reasons the workplace seems to be a suitable setting for prevention. First, because a number of strong risk factors are associated with working conditions and second, because it allows addressing a large proportion of the adult population. Against this background the assessment at hand sets out to answer the following questions: What is the amount and methodological quality of the available scientific literature on the effectiveness of back pain prevention in the workplace environment? What are effective measures for the prevention of back pain and its consequences in the workplace environment and how effective are they? Is back pain prevention in the workplace environment cost-effective? Is there a need for more research? As primary outcomes for effectiveness the assessment will focus on time lost from work and the frequency and duration of episodes with back pain. The preventive measures assessed belong to the following categories: exercise programs, educational and information measures, multidimensional interventions, back belts, lifting teams and ergonomic interventions. ⋯ In conclusion, sound scientific evidence for the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of back pain prevention in the workplace environment is still quite scarce. Further research should include: The development of interventions guided by the bio psychosocial model of back pain aetiology that combines individual prevention as well as measures addressing the workplace environment.The integration of results from basic ergonomic research into prevention concepts and the conduct of trials focussing outcomes with relevance to health.at the workplace setting. The conduct of qualitative studies to identify factors that impair the effectiveness of prevention programs (e. g. motivation, compliance, people skills).The integration of cost-effectiveness evaluations into all interventional studies.
-
GMS Health Technol Assess · Jan 2006
Antioxidative vitamines for prevention of cardiovascular disease for patients after renal transplantation and patients with chronic renal failure.
The mortality from cardiovascular disease in patients with chronic renal failure is much higher than in the general population. In particular, patients with chronic renal failure with replacement therapies (dialysis patients and patients with renal transplantation) show both increased traditional risk factors and risk factors due to the dysfunction of the renal system. In combination with necessary medication for renal insufficiency oxidative stress is elevated. Progression of atherosclerosis is promoted due to increased oxidation of lipids and endothelium damage. This link between lipid oxidation and artherogenesis provides the rationale for the supposed beneficial effect of supplementation with antioxidative vitamins (vitamin A, C and E). Such an effect could not be demonstrated for patients with a history of cardiovascular disease and without kidney diseases. However, in high risk patients with chronic renal failure and renal replacement therapies this could be different. ⋯ The available evidence is not sufficient to support or to reject an effect of antioxidative vitamins on secondary prevention for cardiovascular disease for patients with chronic renal insufficiency or renal replacement therapy. There is a lack of randomized, placebo-controlled studies with a sufficient number of cases and clinical endpoints of cardiovascular disease, on the effect of antioxidative vitamins either orally applied or given by vitamin E-modified dialysers. No data are available about supplementation with antioxidative vitamins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Therefore the current evidence does not allow to draw conclusions concerning this subject either. As opposed to patients with a history of cardiovascular disease without kidney diseases where there is enough evidence to exclude a beneficial effect on secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease for patients with chronic renal insufficiency and renal replacement therapy this question remains unanswered. Conclusions about costs and cost-effectiveness also cannot be drawn.
-
GMS Health Technol Assess · Nov 2005
Minimally invasive surgical procedures for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation.
In up to 30% of patients undergoing lumbar disc surgery for herniated or protruded discs outcomes are judged unfavourable. Over the last decades this problem has stimulated the development of a number of minimally-invasive operative procedures. The aim is to relieve pressure from compromised nerve roots by mechanically removing, dissolving or evaporating disc material while leaving bony structures and surrounding tissues as intact as possible. In Germany, there is hardly any utilisation data for these new procedures - data files from the statutory health insurances demonstrate that about 5% of all lumbar disc surgeries are performed using minimally-invasive techniques. Their real proportion is thought to be much higher because many procedures are offered by private hospitals and surgeries and are paid by private health insurers or patients themselves. So far no comprehensive assessment comparing efficacy, safety, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of minimally-invasive lumbar disc surgery to standard procedures (microdiscectomy, open discectomy) which could serve as a basis for coverage decisions, has been published in Germany. ⋯ Conclusions that can be drawn from the results of the present assessment refer in detail to the specified minimally-invasive procedures of lumbar disc surgery but they may also be considered exemplary for other fields where optimisation of results is attempted by technological development and widening of indications (e.g. total hip replacement). Compared to standard technologies (open discectomy, microdiscectomy) and with the exception of chemonucleolysis, the developmental status of all other minimally-invasive procedures assessed must be termed experimental. To date there is no dependable evidence-base to recommend their use in routine clinical practice. To create such a dependable evidence-base further research in two directions is needed: a) The studies need to include adequate patient populations, use realistic controls (e.g. standard operative procedures or continued conservative care) and use standardised measurements of meaningful outcomes after adequate periods of time. b) Studies that are able to report effectiveness of the procedures under everyday practice conditions and furthermore have the potential to detect rare adverse effects are needed. In Sweden this type of data is yielded by national quality registries. On the one hand their data are used for quality improvement measures and on the other hand they allow comprehensive scientific evaluations. Since the year of 2000 a continuous rise in utilisation of minimally-invasive lumbar disc surgery is observed among statutory health insurers. Examples from other areas of innovative surgical technologies (e.g. robot assisted total hip replacement) indicate that the rise will probably continue - especially because there are no legal barriers to hinder introduction of innovative treatments into routine hospital care. Upon request by payers or providers the "Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss" may assess a treatments benefit, its necessity and cost-effectiveness as a prerequisite for coverage by the statutory health insurance. In the case of minimally-invasive disc surgery it would be advisable to examine the legal framework for covering procedures only if they are provided under evaluation conditions. While in Germany coverage under evaluation conditions is established practice in ambulatory health care only ("Modellvorhaben") examples from other European countries (Great Britain, Switzerland) demonstrate that it is also feasible for hospital based interventions. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)
-
GMS Health Technol Assess · Nov 2005
The impact of HTA reports on health policy: a systematic review.
The objective of health technology assessment (HTA) is to support decision-making in the health sector by assessing health technologies systematically under medical, economic, social, and ethical aspects. The present study aims at identifying ways of enabling the impact of HTA on decision-making processes in the German health sector. The authors formulate three research questions: (1) Can methods be identified that allow a valid assessment of the impact of HTA reports on the decision-making processes? (2) Has been shown an impact of HTA reports on decision-making processes in the health sector? (3) Which are the factors responsible for a high or a low impact of HTA? ⋯ There is little experience with study designs or methods that allow a valid assessment of the impact of HTA reports on the decision-making process in the health sector. However, some approaches, such as the use of pre-defined indicators, were identified that should be pursued and elaborated in further studies. Due to the lack of a developed methodology only limited conclusions related to the impact of HTA reports can be drawn. Among the studies that show a relevant impact, most are methodological. However, results from qualitative studies caution against assuming a causal relationship where a mere coincidence between the recommendations of an HTA report and health policy is identified. In order to produce evidence-based conclusions regarding the impact of HTA reports, validated indicators should be used. Study design should also aim at controlling for other influencing factors. None of the studies explicitly aim at examining the role of the factors that might be responsible for a low or high impact of the HTA reports. The non-systematic retrospective analyses do not allow reliable conclusions regarding the relevance of these factors. Therefore the factors identified here should only serve for hypothesis formation. On the basis of these studies it is not possible to give evidence-based recommendations on the way how to increase the impact of HTA on decision-making in Germany. Instead a concept for evaluation should be developed that combines quantitative and qualitative methods and considers the following questions:(1) What kind of impact should be measured? (2) Which are the target groups and at which level of the health system are they located? (3) Which are the outcome parameters and how can they be measured? (4) Which are the potential impact enhancing or limiting factors?