RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare morphine milligram equivalent (MME) requirements for acute pain management between patients admitted for medical or surgical diagnoses with opioid use disorder (OUD) who receive >12 mg of sublingual buprenorphine daily compared with those who receive ≤12 mg/d. DESIGN: This study was performed via retrospective chart review. SETTING: This study evaluated patient encounters between January 2017 and November 2021 from a single-center community teaching hospital in Lancaster, PA. METHODS: Patients were assessed according to daily dose of buprenorphine received while admitted (>12 mg/d vs ≤12 mg/d); patients who had buprenorphine held were included within the ≤12 mg/d study group. The primary outcome evaluated daily average MME requirements over the entirety of hospital length of stay. Key secondary outcomes were total MME requirements and daily average pain scores. SUBJECTS: Key inclusion criteria were sublingual buprenorphine therapy for at least 1 month prior to admission, presence of an acute pain diagnosis during hospital stay, and history of OUD. RESULTS: Seventy-eight (78) patients were included for analysis. Daily average MME requirements were similar between patients who received buprenorphine >12 mg/d and ≤12 mg/d (median, 7.5 vs 10.6; P = 0.350). Total MME and daily average pain scores were similar between study groups. CONCLUSIONS: For OUD patients in need of acute pain management, the continuation of sublingual buprenorphine throughout hospitalization at a daily dose of >12 mg/d compared with ≤12 mg/d did not confer a significant difference in daily average MME requirements.
Assuntos
Buprenorfina , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Humanos , Manejo da Dor , Estudos Retrospectivos , DorRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treating young children with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) with new direct-acting antivirals. STUDY DESIGN: A state-transition model of chronic HCV was developed to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing treatment at age 6 years vs delaying treatment until age 18 years. Model inputs were derived from recently conducted systematic reviews, published literature, and government statistics. Medical care costs were obtained from linked population level laboratory and administrative data (Ontario, Canada). Outcomes are expressed in expected quality-adjusted life-years and costs (CAD$). Analysis included a base-case to estimate the expected value and one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to evaluate the impact of uncertainty of the model inputs. RESULTS: After 20 years, treating 10 000 children early would prevent 330 cases of cirrhosis, 18 cases of hepatocellular carcinoma, and 48 liver-related deaths. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of early treatment compared to delayed treatment was approximately $12 690/quality-adjusted life-years gained and considered cost-effective. Model results were robust to variation in fibrosis progression rates, disease state-based costs, treatment costs, and utilities. CONCLUSIONS: Delaying treatment until age 18 years results in an increased lifetime risk of late-stage liver complications. Early treatment in children is cost effective. Our work supports clinical and health policies that broaden HCV treatment access to young children.