Workplace Electronic Health Promotion Campaigns for Tobacco Smoking Prevention or Cessation: A Review of Cost-Effectiveness

Details

Question(s)

  1. What is the cost-effectiveness of workplace EHPCs for the prevention or cessation of tobacco smoking?

Key Message

There is a lack of recent evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of workplace electronic health promotion campaigns (EHPCs) for the prevention or cessation of tobacco smoking. There is a need for well-designed economic evaluations to assess the cost-effectiveness of workplace EHPCs for the prevention or cessation of tobacco smoking.

Negative Pressure Wound Therapy on surgical incisions for Patients Post-Surgery

Details

Question(s)

  1. What is the clinical effectiveness of negative pressure wound therapy for the prevention of surgical site infections for patients post-surgery?
  2. What is the cost-effectiveness of negative pressure wound therapy for the prevention of surgical site infections for patients post-surgery?
  3. What are the evidence-based guidelines regarding negative pressure wound therapy for the prevention of surgical site infections for patients post-surgery?

Key Message

Overall, the identified evidence suggested that the -125 mmHg negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) system is statistically significantly more effective than conventional wound dressing for preventing surgical site infections (SSI), though some studies showed no difference. However, results from a systematic review subgroup analysis indicated that the difference in SSI incidence between the NPWT and standard dressing groups reached the level of significance only in patients who had superficial SSI (Szilagyi I). Due to conflicting results from the included studies, there was no conclusive evidence indicating that a -125 mmHg negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) system is statistically significantly more effective than conventional wound dressing for reducing the rate of reoperation and readmissions due to wound complications, or reducing the duration of postoperative stay in hospital or the intensive care unit. Evidence of limited quality suggested that at the time of discharge after surgery, patients’ health-related quality of life (HRQoL) may be significantly better with NPWT than standard wound dressing. However, there was no statistically significant difference in HRQoL scores at the 6-week follow-up assessment. The difference in mortality rate between the two groups was not statistically significant, and the causes of death were not reported. The evidence concerning non-SSI outcomes was limited in quality due to study design and methodological limitations such as open-label randomized controlled trials with unclear exclusion criteria, suboptimal randomization processes, and high patient dropout rate. Furthermore, most of the studies had inherently higher risk of systemic biases because they were non-randomized and lacked the risk-diminishing property of randomization.The literature search for this review did not identify any relevant evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of using a -125 mm Hg negative pressure wound therapy device; therefore, no summary can be provided.The evidence-based guideline recommends that surgeons assess individual patients’ risk factors and surgical risks and consider using negative pressure wound therapy for patients at high risk for developing surgical site occurrences, or who are undergoing a high-risk procedure, or a procedure that would have highly morbid consequences if a surgical site infection occurred. The strength of the recommendation and the specific evidence supporting it were not provided. However, the authors indicate that evidence for the guideline came from 100 publications, including systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and non-randomized studies.

Nasal Decolonization for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infections: A Review of Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness

Details

Question(s)

  1. What is the clinical effectiveness of pre-operative nasal decolonization, with or without chlorhexidine gluconate washes or wipes, for the prevention of surgical site infections?
  2. What is the cost-effectiveness of pre-operative nasal decolonization, with or without chlorhexidine gluconate washes or wipes, for the prevention of surgical site infections?

Key Message

Two systematic reviews with two relevant randomized controlled trials and two randomized controlled trials were identified that addressed the clinical effectiveness of pre-operative nasal decolonization for the prevention of surgical site infections. Evidence regarding nasal decolonization with a pre-operative chlorhexidine shower, with or without a chlorhexidine oral rinse, was neutral for the prevention of surgical site infections and the risk of mortality. However, the body of evidence was small, heterogenous, and had high uncertainty. The evidence for adverse events was inconclusive. No evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of pre-operative nasal decolonization for the prevention of surgical site infections was identified.

Gravity Drainage Versus Forced Suction Drainage for Patients With Excess Fluid in Pleural or Peritoneal Spaces

Details

Question(s)

  1. What is the comparative clinical effectiveness of draining pleural or peritoneal spaces with gravity compared with forced suction?
  2. What are the evidence-based guidelines regarding the drainage of pleural or peritoneal spaces using gravity or forced suction?

Key Message

The evidence for chest drainage with gravity compared with forced suction was mixed. Two randomized controlled trials included in 2 systematic reviews with meta-analysis suggested that there is no difference between chest drainage with gravity versus forced suction regarding the risk of prolonged air leak, or post-operative pneumothorax and the duration of chest tube drainage, or hospital stay, following lung cancer surgery. However, 1 randomized controlled trial included in a systematic review with meta-analysis suggested that chest drainage with gravity resulted in a shorter duration of chest tube drainage and hospital stay compared to forced suction following lung cancer surgery. One guideline suggests that chest drainage with forced suction does not provide additional benefits for patients undergoing lung surgery compared to gravity drainage. There is a lack of relevant literature and guidelines on the clinical effectiveness or use of abdominal space drainage with gravity or forced suction.

Droperidol for Agitation in Acute Care: Clinical Effectiveness

Details

Question(s)

  1. What is the clinical effectiveness of droperidol for the management of violence and aggression in acute care settings?
  2. What are the evidence-based guidelines regarding the use of droperidol in acute care settings?

Key Message

Comparative evidence supports that droperidol is as effective as haloperidol and olanzapine for the sedation of adult patients with uncontrolled aggression, anxiety, or violent behaviour in acute care settings, and a limited quantity of evidence supports the superiority of droperidol over ziprasidone and lorazepam monotherapies. There are no statistically significant differences in adverse event frequency or severity in adult patients treated with droperidol compared with haloperidol or olanzapine. Guidelines published in 2015 support the safety and efficacy of droperidol treatment for agitation based on high-quality relevant evidence. These guidelines found insufficient evidence to support electrocardiogram or telemetry monitoring of patients who were administered less than 2.5 mg of droperidol.

Codeine for Acute Extremity Pain: A Review of Clinical Effectiveness

Details

Question(s)

  1. What is the clinical effectiveness of codeine for patients with acute extremity pain?
  2. What is the clinical effectiveness of codeine with acetaminophen and/or an NSAID for patients with acute extremity pain?

Key Message

No comparative evidence was found on the use of codeine, as a single ingredient, for acute extremity pain management. There are many types of codeine combinations drugs available, which makes a direct comparison difficult and increases the uncertainty of the results. Although the overall analysis is inconclusive, in many comparisons, codeine was no different than the comparator group in increasing patient satisfaction or in reducing pain scores, the need for additional analgesia, and the number of adverse events. Most of the evidence is from studies without a placebo arm; therefore, it is not possible to know how much of the pain reduction was unrelated to codeine. Most of the evidence is from studies in which patients received a single dose of a codeine combination drug and were observed for a very limited time, usually minutes to hours. This increases the uncertainty of the findings, and safety information needs to be interpreted with caution.

Screening Tools for Chronic Postsurgical Pain: A Review of Clinical Utility

Details

Question(s)

  1. What is the clinical utility of screening or prediction tools for the prevention of the progression of acute post-surgical pain to chronic postsurgical pain?

Key Message

Potentially relevant risk factors for the development of chronic post-surgical pain include genetics, pre-surgical pain (presence and severity), mental health, surgical techniques, type of surgery, and sex. Tools to assess these factors may be useful for identifying patients at a higher risk of developing chronic pain post-surgery. No relevant publications were identified demonstrating a benefit of using tools to assess the risk of chronic post-surgical pain development and improving patient outcomes. Therefore, no conclusions regarding clinical utility can be provided.

Rapid and Simultaneous Tuberculosis and Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing for the Diagnosis of Pulmonary Tuberculosis and Rifampicin Resistance: A Review of Diagnostic Accuracy

Details

Question(s)

  1. What is the diagnostic accuracy of rapid and simultaneous tuberculosis and antibiotic susceptibility testing for the detection of pulmonary tuberculosis compared to smear microscopy?
  2. What is the diagnostic accuracy of rapid and simultaneous tuberculosis and antibiotic susceptibility testing for the detection of pulmonary tuberculosis compared to mycobacterial cultures?
  3. What is the diagnostic accuracy of rapid and simultaneous tuberculosis and antibiotic susceptibility testing for the detection of rifampicin resistance compared to culture-based drug susceptibility testing?

Key Message

A total of six systematic reviews were identified. Three systematic reviews reported on the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert with respect to smear microscopy status. There was variability in the estimates of sensitivities and specificities in both the smear positive and smear negative subgroups in the individual studies included in these three systematic reviews, One systematic review reported that the sensitivity with Xpert was 36% to 44% higher than the sensitivity with smear microscopy. Five systematic reviews reported on the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert and/or Xpert Ultra compared with mycobacterial culture test. The sensitivities of Xpert ranged between 62% and 85%; and the specificities ranged between 98% and 99% (based on four systematic reviews). The sensitivities of Xpert Ultra ranged between 64% and 100%; and specificities ranged between 96% and 100% (based on two systematic reviews). Six systematic reviews reported on the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert or both Xpert and Xpert Ultra for the detection of rifampicin resistance compared to culture-based drug susceptibility testing. For rifampicin resistance detection with Xpert, the sensitivities ranged between 83% and 100%, and the specificities ranged between 97% and 100% (based on six systematic reviews). For rifampicin resistance detection with Xpert Ultra the sensitivities ranged between 93% and 95%, and the specificities ranged between 98% and 99% (based on two systematic reviews. The findings need to be interpreted in the light of limitations (such as variations in specimen types and settings; limited evidence for Xpert Ultra; and lack of generalizability with respect to the Canadian setting).

Coverage Categories at Public Drugs Plans in Canada

Details

Canada's Drug Agency conducted an Environmental Scan to provide information on the various coverage categories under which drugs are listed in the Canadian federal, provincial, and territorial drug plans’ formularies for reimbursement.

 

Coverage Categories at Public Drugs Plans in Canada


(December 17, 2024)

Abbreviations

Abbreviations Full Name
AB Alberta
BC British Columbia
CAF Canadian Armed Forces
CSC Correctional Services Canada
ES Environmental Scan
MB Manitoba
NIHB Non-Insured Health Benefits
NL