Cargando…

How real can we get in generating real world evidence? Exploring the opportunities of routinely collected administrative data for evaluation of medical devices

Real‐world data are considered a potentially valuable source of evidence for assessing medical technologies in clinical practice, but their widespread use is hampered by numerous challenges. Using the case of coronary stents in Italy, we investigate the potential of administrative databases for esti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pongiglione, Benedetta, Torbica, Aleksandra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9796733/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35762465
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.4562
_version_ 1784860553710141440
author Pongiglione, Benedetta
Torbica, Aleksandra
author_facet Pongiglione, Benedetta
Torbica, Aleksandra
author_sort Pongiglione, Benedetta
collection PubMed
description Real‐world data are considered a potentially valuable source of evidence for assessing medical technologies in clinical practice, but their widespread use is hampered by numerous challenges. Using the case of coronary stents in Italy, we investigate the potential of administrative databases for estimating costs and health outcomes associated with the use of medical devices in real world conditions. An administrative dataset was created ad hoc by merging hospital records from patients admitted between 2013 and 2019 for stent implantations with ambulatory records, pharmaceutical use data and vital statistics. Health outcomes were multifold: all‐cause and cardiac mortality and myocardial infarction, within 30 days, 1, 2, 5 years. Costs were estimated from the National Health System perspective. We used multivariable Cox models and propensity score (PS) methods (PS matching; stratification on PS; inverse probability of treatment weighting using PS; PS adjustment). 257,907 coronary stents were implanted in 113,912 patients. For all health outcomes and follow‐up times, and across all methods, patients receiving drug‐eluting stents (DES) presented lower risk. For all‐cause mortality, the DES patient advantage over bare‐metal stent (BMS) patients declined over time but remained significant even at 5 years. For myocardial infarction, results remained quite stable. The DES group presented lower cumulative total costs (ranging from 3264 to 2363 Euros less depending on methods). Our results confirm the consolidated evidence of the benefits of DES compared to BMS. The consistency of results across methods suggests internal validity of the study, while highlighting strengths and limitations of each depending on research context. Administrative data yield great potential to perform comparative effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness analysis of medical devices provided certain conditions are met.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9796733
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97967332023-01-04 How real can we get in generating real world evidence? Exploring the opportunities of routinely collected administrative data for evaluation of medical devices Pongiglione, Benedetta Torbica, Aleksandra Health Econ Supplement Papers Real‐world data are considered a potentially valuable source of evidence for assessing medical technologies in clinical practice, but their widespread use is hampered by numerous challenges. Using the case of coronary stents in Italy, we investigate the potential of administrative databases for estimating costs and health outcomes associated with the use of medical devices in real world conditions. An administrative dataset was created ad hoc by merging hospital records from patients admitted between 2013 and 2019 for stent implantations with ambulatory records, pharmaceutical use data and vital statistics. Health outcomes were multifold: all‐cause and cardiac mortality and myocardial infarction, within 30 days, 1, 2, 5 years. Costs were estimated from the National Health System perspective. We used multivariable Cox models and propensity score (PS) methods (PS matching; stratification on PS; inverse probability of treatment weighting using PS; PS adjustment). 257,907 coronary stents were implanted in 113,912 patients. For all health outcomes and follow‐up times, and across all methods, patients receiving drug‐eluting stents (DES) presented lower risk. For all‐cause mortality, the DES patient advantage over bare‐metal stent (BMS) patients declined over time but remained significant even at 5 years. For myocardial infarction, results remained quite stable. The DES group presented lower cumulative total costs (ranging from 3264 to 2363 Euros less depending on methods). Our results confirm the consolidated evidence of the benefits of DES compared to BMS. The consistency of results across methods suggests internal validity of the study, while highlighting strengths and limitations of each depending on research context. Administrative data yield great potential to perform comparative effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness analysis of medical devices provided certain conditions are met. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-06-28 2022-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9796733/ /pubmed/35762465 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.4562 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Health Economics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Supplement Papers
Pongiglione, Benedetta
Torbica, Aleksandra
How real can we get in generating real world evidence? Exploring the opportunities of routinely collected administrative data for evaluation of medical devices
title How real can we get in generating real world evidence? Exploring the opportunities of routinely collected administrative data for evaluation of medical devices
title_full How real can we get in generating real world evidence? Exploring the opportunities of routinely collected administrative data for evaluation of medical devices
title_fullStr How real can we get in generating real world evidence? Exploring the opportunities of routinely collected administrative data for evaluation of medical devices
title_full_unstemmed How real can we get in generating real world evidence? Exploring the opportunities of routinely collected administrative data for evaluation of medical devices
title_short How real can we get in generating real world evidence? Exploring the opportunities of routinely collected administrative data for evaluation of medical devices
title_sort how real can we get in generating real world evidence? exploring the opportunities of routinely collected administrative data for evaluation of medical devices
topic Supplement Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9796733/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35762465
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.4562
work_keys_str_mv AT pongiglionebenedetta howrealcanwegetingeneratingrealworldevidenceexploringtheopportunitiesofroutinelycollectedadministrativedataforevaluationofmedicaldevices
AT torbicaaleksandra howrealcanwegetingeneratingrealworldevidenceexploringtheopportunitiesofroutinelycollectedadministrativedataforevaluationofmedicaldevices