Literature DB >> 29740729

A novel flash glucose monitoring system in patients with diabetes mellitus type 1 and 2: which are the pieces of evidence for payer decision-makers?

Salvatore Corrao1,2, Biagio Nativo3, Giuseppe Natoli4, Marika Lo Monaco4, Francesco Perticone5.   

Abstract

A rigorous health technology assessment is necessary to evaluate a new technology. However, healthcare regulatory agencies have less restrictive rules about medical devices, despite some recent warnings about this relevant matter. The evaluation should have at least two key issues, which require attention. The first one is its effectiveness, and the second one is its economic sustainability. In this paper, we deal with a novel glucose-sensing technology as a case study to examine the matter in depth. An evidence-based point of view is used to highlight this important issue.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical; Biomedical technology; Decision making; Economic; Ethics; Organizational; Technology assessment

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29740729     DOI: 10.1007/s11739-018-1855-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Intern Emerg Med        ISSN: 1828-0447            Impact factor:   3.397


  10 in total

1.  Payer decision-making with limited comparative and cost effectiveness data: the case of new pharmacological treatments for gout.

Authors:  Michele Meltzer; Laura T Pizzi; Eric Jutkowitz
Journal:  Evid Based Med       Date:  2012-02-18

Review 2.  Surrogate outcomes are associated with low methodological quality of studies of rheumatoid arthritis treated with antitumour necrosis factor agents: a systematic review.

Authors:  Moacyr Roberto Cuce Nobre; Frnanda Marques da Costa
Journal:  Evid Based Med       Date:  2011-10-12

3.  Novel glucose-sensing technology and hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes: a multicentre, non-masked, randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Jan Bolinder; Ramiro Antuna; Petronella Geelhoed-Duijvestijn; Jens Kröger; Raimund Weitgasser
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2016-09-12       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  The impact of HTA and procurement practices on the selection and prices of medical devices.

Authors:  Giuditta Callea; Patrizio Armeni; Marta Marsilio; Claudio Jommi; Rosanna Tarricone
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2016-11-29       Impact factor: 4.634

5.  Monitoring Medical Devices: Missed Warning Signs Within Existing Data.

Authors:  Andrew M Ibrahim; Justin B Dimick
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-07-25       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 6.  Approach to economic analysis in critical care.

Authors:  Kwadwo Kyeremanteng; Cynthia Wan; Gianni D'Egidio; David Neilipovitz
Journal:  J Crit Care       Date:  2016-07-09       Impact factor: 3.425

7.  FDA Approval of Nonadjunctive Use of Continuous Glucose Monitors for Insulin Dosing: A Potentially Risky Decision.

Authors:  Alan R Shapiro
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Efficacy and effectiveness trials have different goals, use different tools, and generate different messages.

Authors:  Franz Porzsolt; Natália Galito Rocha; Alessandra C Toledo-Arruda; Tania G Thomaz; Cristiane Moraes; Thais R Bessa-Guerra; Mauricio Leão; Arn Migowski; André R Araujo da Silva; Christel Weiss
Journal:  Pragmat Obs Res       Date:  2015-11-04

9.  Flash Glucose-Sensing Technology as a Replacement for Blood Glucose Monitoring for the Management of Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes: a Multicenter, Open-Label Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Thomas Haak; Hélène Hanaire; Ramzi Ajjan; Norbert Hermanns; Jean-Pierre Riveline; Gerry Rayman
Journal:  Diabetes Ther       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 2.945

10.  Qualitative assessment of innovations in healthcare provision.

Authors:  Franz Porzsolt; Amit K Ghosh; Robert M Kaplan
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2009-03-19       Impact factor: 2.655

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.