/
Implementation of new technologies Implementation of new technologies

Implementation of new technologies - PowerPoint Presentation

delcy
delcy . @delcy
Follow
343 views
Uploaded On 2022-06-11

Implementation of new technologies - PPT Presentation

Dr Keith Cooper Southampton Health Technology Assessments Centre University of Southampton Structure of talk Introduction Background to evidence based decision making for implementing new technologies ID: 916194

storage cost perfusion cold cost storage cold perfusion health technology machine transplant nice kidney preservation clinical costs lifeport effectiveness

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Implementation of new technologies" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Implementation of new technologies

Dr Keith CooperSouthampton Health Technology Assessments CentreUniversity of Southampton

Slide2

Structure of talkIntroductionBackground to evidence based decision making for implementing new technologies

Example: Machine perfusion preservation vs. cold storage in kidney transplantation

Slide3

IntroductionWithin health care systems there is limited resources and increasing demand on services

Choices need to be made in a fair and equitable manner

Choice B

Choice A

Slide4

HTA modelling

Health Technology Assessment aims to evaluate health technologies by investigating:whether the technology works for whom at what cost how it compares with the alternativesA health technology can be any intervention that improves health and includes

medications, devices, hospital procedures, health promotion activities and diagnostic testsHealth Technology Assessment in the UK is overseen by the NIHR HTA programme Provides Technology Assessment Reports for NICE

Slide5

NICE (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence)

Provides guidance to NHS on new technologies, promote clinical excellence and the effective use of resources within the NHS. Recommendations are based upon Clinical evidence: systematic review, meta analysesEconomic evidence: cost effectiveness modelsBases decision-making on Technology Assessment Reports (TARs) and manufacturer submissions

TARs produced by university departments, such as Southampton Health Technology Assessments Centre (SHTAC)New technologies are most often more effective and more costly – is it good value for money to adopt?

Slide6

NICE decision making – Cost effectiveness

Costs and health benefits are estimated for patients on alternative treatmentsHealth benefits are in term of Quality Adjusted Life YearsLife expectancy + Quality of lifeCompare new treatment with existing treatment(s)NICE is more likely to recommend a treatment if its cost effectiveness is lower than CE threshold (£30,000 per QALY)

Slide7

Machine perfusion systems and cold static storage of kidneys from deceased donors

NICE technology appraisal guidance [TA165] Published date: January 2009Assessment group report by PenTAG, university of Exeter(Bond, Pitt, Akoh, Moxham, Hoyle, Anderson)

Slide8

What is the best method of preservation for kidneys for transplantation?

Cold storage solutionsthe kidney is flushed through with a sterile preservation solution and is kept on ice in a box before transplantationMarshall's hypertonic citrate (Soltran, Baxter Healthcare) and Belzer UW (Viaspan, Bristol Myers Squibb)Machine perfusion systemsMachine perfusion systems continuously pump cold preservation solution through the kidneyThe LifePortTM kidney transporter (Organ Recovery Systems), RM3 renal preservation system (Waters Medical Systems)

Slide9

Clinical evidence

Machine Preservation Trial (Moers, 2008)PPART study (Watson 2010)

Cold storage (Viaspan)N= 336Machine perfusion (Lifeport

)N = 336Cold storageN = 45Machine perfusion (Lifeport

)

N = 45

Proportion of delayed

graft function following transplant

26.5%

20.8%

56%

58%

Proportion of primary

non function

4.8%

2.1%

0%

2%

Graft survival at 1 year

90%

94%

98%

93.3%

Slide10

Cost effectiveness model

Slide11

Other model parameters (costs)

Parameter Value

Storage cost per Kidney:Cold storage (ViaSpan)

£262.33

Machine perfusion (LifePort)

£736.55

Other

costs

Transplant cost

£16,413

Dialysis cost (per month)

£2052

Post transplant

cost (month 1-3)

£2463

Post transplant cost (month 4-12)

£1385

Slide12

Other model parameters (QALY)

Quality of life values (age 50 years)Transplant state: 0.75Dialysis state: 0.63

Slide13

Cost effectiveness results

Results using MPT data (Moers 2008)Costs per patientHealth benefits (QALYs)Preferred technology

Cold storage (ViaSpan)£142,8059.58Machine

perfusion (LifePort)£139,1109.79

Difference

£-3695

0.22

Machine perfusion

Results using PPART data (Watson

2010)

Costs per patient

Health

benefits (QALYs)

Preferred technology

Cold storage (ViaSpan)

£139,205

9.19

Machine

perfusion (

LifePort

)

£141,319

9.13

Difference

£2114

-0.06

Cold storage

Slide14

NICE recommendations

The overall costs and benefits associated with kidney transplantation using either machine perfusion or cold static storage were similar. The Committee recommended that the LifePort kidney transporter be considered as an alternative to cold static storage solutions. The choice of which to use would depend on clinical and logistical factors within both the retrieval team and transplant centres.

Slide15

NICE – recommendations further research

The Committee considered that it was important for transplant centres to collect standardised and comprehensive data that follow up the outcomes for kidneys stored using different methods.

Slide16

ConclusionsUnclear from current data (2009), whether machine perfusion preferable to cold storage

Depends upon trial data usedDifficult to show difference in clinical outcomesLarge RCT is needed which may not be practicalOther more recent studies have come to different conclusionsGomez et al 2012 – MP is cost effectiveGroen et al 2012 – MP cost savingJochmans 2015 (Transplant International) provides excellent overview of current evidence

Slide17

Thank you!