Service design and in particular co-design are approaches able to align with the need of healthcare contexts of value-based and patient-centered processing through a participatory design of services. The purpose of this study is to identify the characteristics of co-design and its applicability to the reengineering of healthcare services, as well as to detect the peculiarities of the application of this approach in different geographical contexts. The methodology applied for the review, Systematic Literature Network Analysis (SLNA), combines qualitative and quantitative perspectives. In detail, the analysis applied the paper citation networks and the co-word network analysis to detect the main research trends over time and to identify the most relevant publications. The results of the analysis highlight the backbone of literature on the application of co-design in healthcare as well as the advantages and the critical factors of the approach. Three main literature streams emerged concerning the integration of the approach at meso and micro level, the implementation of co-design at mega and macro level, and the impacts on non-clinical related outcomes. Moreover, the findings underline differences in co-design in terms of impacts and success factors in developed countries and economies in transition or developing countries. The analysis shows the potentially added value of the application of a participatory approach to the design and redesign of healthcare services both at different levels of the healthcare organization and in the contexts of developed countries and economies in transition or developing countries. The evidence also highlights potentialities and critical success factors of the application of co-design in healthcare services redesign.

Background: The aim of the analysis is to assess the efficiency of the allocation of economic resources related to the use of letermovir cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis in adult seropositive recipients (R+) patients receiving an allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), compared with a no-prophylaxis strategy, assuming preemptive antiviral administration in both groups from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service (NHS), through a cost-effectiveness analysis. Methods: The model used is based on a decision tree which simulates on a lifetime horizon the progression of CMV infection, considering two alternatives: the use of letermovir CMV prophylaxis, followed by preemptive therapy in case of clinically significant CMV infection, or the avoided use of letermovir CMV prophylaxis, considering direct medical costs (referred to 2018) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), both discounted considering a 3% annual rate. Two scenarios were considered, representing the differences related to regional contexts and clinical practice of different typologies of hospitals (public or private accredited with Regional Health Services). Results: The use of letermovir prophylaxis compared with no prophylaxis strategy would lead to an increase of QALYs and direct medical costs in the two scenarios considered, with a mean increase of 0.45 QALYs, and an increase of direct medical costs of 10,222.4 € and of 10,809.9 € in the two scenarios. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are equal to 22,564 €/QALY and 23,861 €/QALY. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis conducted showed a percentage of results below the threshold of 40,000 €/QALY of 67.4% and 71.3%; and below a threshold of 25,000 €/QALY equal to 50.4% and to 53.0%. Conclusions: The use of letermovir CMV prophylaxis in adult R+ patients receiving allogenic HSCT, compared with a no-prophylaxis strategy, would be cost-effective for the Italian NHS considering the incremental cost-effectiveness thresholds of 40,000 €/QALY and of 25,000 €/QALY.

In the healthcare sector, it is crucial to identify sustainable strategies in order to allow the introduction and use of innovative technologies. Now, and over the next few years, the expiry of patents for different antiretroviral drugs offers an opportunity to increase the efficiency of resources allocation. The aim of the present study was to assess the impact, on the budget of the Italian National Healthcare Service, of generic antiretroviral drugs and of new antiretroviral drugs entering the market from 2015 to 2019. A budget impact model was developed in order to forecast the rate of use of ARTs, based on trends observed within the Lombardy Region (Italy), on clinical experts’ opinion, and the consequent impact on the Italian NHS budget in a five year time horizon. Different scenarios were developed, considering the sole introduction of generic drugs, of new drugs, and their cumulative effects. A multivariate sensitivity analysis was also performed. The cumulative use of generic drugs and new drugs would lead to annual savings of 4.6 million € (-0.6 %) in 2015; 16.9 million € (-2.1 %) in 2016; 19.4 million € (-2.4 %) in 2017; 51.1 million € (-6.1 %) in 2018 and -110.3 million € (-12.8 %) in 2019. The impact of new drugs in percentage terms is +2.0 % in 2015, +3.4 % in 2016, +3.9 % in 2017, +5.7 % in 2018 and +7.7 % in 2019. The impact of generic drugs would lead to savings of 4.9 million € in 2015, 18.6 million € in 2016, 22.8 million € in 2017, 76.5 million € in 2018 and 187.4 million € in 2019. The sensitivity analysis showed annual mean savings for the Italian NHS ranging from 12.6 million €, -1.5 % compared to the base case scenario (decreasing all the rates of transition used in the simulation, and increasing the cost of generic drugs) to 76.0 million €, -9.1 % (increasing all the rates of transition used in the simulation, and decreasing the cost of generic and new drugs). The use of antiretroviral generic drugs may lead to savings that would compensate the expenditure increase due to new, innovative drugs available on the market.

Adequate treatment of trauma pain is an integral part of the management of trauma patients, not just for ethical reasons but also because undertreated pain can lead to increased morbidities and worse long-term outcomes. Trauma pain management presents challenges in the pre-hospital setting, particularly in adverse or hostile environments as well as in busy emergency departments (EDs). Inhaled methoxyflurane, administered at analgesic doses via a disposable inhaler, has recently become available in Europe for the emergency treatment of moderate to severe pain in conscious adult trauma patients. A growing body of evidence demonstrates that inhaled methoxyflurane is well tolerated and effective in providing a rapid onset of analgesia. In this paper, we discuss the rationale for methoxyflurane use in trauma pain management, data from clinical trials recently conducted in Europe, its efficacy and safety profile compared to current standard treatments, its place in therapy and organizational impact. We conclude that inhaled methoxyflurane represents an effective treatment option in the different settings where trauma patients require rapid and flexible pain resolution, with potential organizational advantages.

Objective: In vitro diagnostic tests for SARS-COV-2, also known as serological tests, have rapidly spread. However, to date, mostly single-center technical and diagnostic performance's assessments have been carried out without an intralaboratory validation process and a health technology assessment (HTA) systematic approach. Therefore, the rapid HTA for evaluating antibody tests for SARS-COV-2 was applied. Methods: The use of rapid HTA is an opportunity to test innovative technology. Unlike traditional HTA (which evaluates the benefits of new technologies after being tested in clinical trials or have been applied in practice for some time), the rapid HTA is performed during the early stages of developing new technology. A multidisciplinary team conducted the rapid HTA following the HTA Core Model^® (version 3.0) developed by the European Network for Health Technology Assessment. Results: The three methodological and analytical steps used in the HTA applied to the evaluation of antibody tests for SARS-COV-2 are reported: the selection of the tests to be evaluated; the research and collection of information to support the adoption and appropriateness of the technology; and the preparation of the final reports and their dissemination. Finally, the rapid HTA of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 is summarized in a report that allows its dissemination and communication. Conclusions: The rapid-HTA evaluation method, in addition to highlighting the characteristics that differentiate the tests from each other, guarantees a timely and appropriate evaluation, becoming a tool to create a direct link between science and health management.

Background: In January 2014, the European Medicines Agency issued a marketing authorization for dolutegravir (DTG), a second-generation integrase strand transfer inhibitor for HIV treatment. The study aimed at determining the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the use of DTG+backbone compared with raltegravir (RAL)+backbone, darunavir (DRV)+ritonavir(r)+backbone and efavirenz/tenofovir/emtricitabine (EFV/TDF/FTC) in HIV-positive treatment-naïve patients and compared with RAL+backbone in treatment-experienced patients, from the Italian National Health Service’s point of view. Materials and methods: A published Monte Carlo Individual Simulation Model (ARAMIS-DTG model) was used to perform the analysis. Patients pass through mutually exclusive health states (defined in terms of diagnosis of HIV with or without opportunistic infections [OIs] and cardiovascular disease [CVD]) and successive lines of therapy. The model considers costs (2014) and quality of life per monthly cycle in a lifetime horizon. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) are dependent on OI, CVD, AIDS events, adverse events and antiretroviral therapies. Results: In treatment-naïve patients, DTG dominates RAL; compared with DRV/r, the ICER obtained is of 38,586 €/QALY (6,170 €/QALY in patients with high viral load) and over EFV/TDF/FTC, DTG generates an ICER of 33,664 €/QALY. In treatment-experienced patients, DTG compared to RAL leads to an ICER of 12,074 €/QALY. Conclusion: The use of DTG+backbone may be cost effective in treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients compared with RAL+backbone and in treatment-naïve patients compared with DRV/r+backbone and EFV/TDF/FTC considering a threshold of 40,000 €/QALY.