Traduction de «al effect and cost-effectiveness » (Français → Néerlandais) :

Aliment Pharamcol Ther 2009; 29:55-68. van Marrewijk C, Mujakovic S, Fransen G et al. Effect and cost-effectiveness of step-up versus step-down treatment with antacids, H2-receptor antagonists, and proton pump inhibitors in patients with new onset dyspepsia (DIAMOND study): primary-care-based randomised controlled trial.
Aliment Pharamcol Ther 2009; 29:55-68. Numans ME, de Wit NJ, Dirven JAM et al. NHG Standaard Maagklachten, tweede herziening.

Van Den Bruel A, Cleemput I, Van Linden A, Schoefs D, Ramaekers D, Bonneux L. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation strategies.
Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation strategies.

36. Woolacott NF, Jones L, Forbes CA, Mather LC, Sowden AJ, Song FJ et al. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation: a systematic review and economic evaluation.
36. Woolacott NF, Jones L, Forbes CA, Mather LC, Sowden AJ, Song FJ et al. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Conformément aux standards du NICE, les résultats ont été relativement défavorables et " le Comité a conclu que l'ICER (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio – ratio cout efficacité incrémental) le plus plausible du bevacizumab plus paclitaxel versus du paclitaxel toutes les semaines se situait entre £110,000 et £259,000 par QALY gagné”.
Volgens de NICE normen waren de resultaten relatief ongunstig en " de Commissie besloot dat de meest plausibele ICER (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio - incrementele kosteneffectiviteitsratio) voor bevacizumab in combinatie met paclitaxel ten opzichte van wekelijkse paclitaxel tussen £110,000 en £259,000 per gewonnen QALY schommelde" .

Slideshow : What are the chances that patients contribute to improve quality and cost-effectiveness of health care?
Slideshow : What are the chances that patients contribute to improve quality and cost-effectiveness of health care?

Stavrou D, Weissman O, Winkler E, Millet E, Nardini G, Tessone A, et al. Managing the relationship between quality and cost-effective burn care.
16. Rortgen D, Bergrath S, Rossaint R, Beckers SK, Fischermann H, Na IS, et al. Comparison of physician staffed emergency teams with paramedic teams assisted by telemedicine--a randomized, controlled simulation study.

61. Coleman RW, Rodondi LC et al : Cost-effectiveness of prospective and continuous antibiotic control : expérience et thé Palo Alto Veterans Affairs Médical Center from 1987 to 1989.
61. Coleman RW, Rodondi LC et al: Cost-effectiveness of prospective and continuous antibiotic control: experience at the Palo Alto Veterans Affairs Medical Center from 1987 to 1989.

hospital: what have we learned?J Hosp Infect 2001; 47(1):9-18 43 Kunori T, Cookson B, Roberts JA et al. Cost-effectiveness of different MRSA screening methods.
hospital: what have we learned?J Hosp Infect 2001; 47(1):9-18 44 Kunori T, Cookson B, Roberts JA et al. Cost-effectiveness of different MRSA screening methods.

Odds ratio of NRT versus control: 1.67 Odds ratio of Buproprion versus control: 2.1 Odds ratio of NRT+Buproprion versus control: 2.65 From these Odds Ratios and information on the control 12-month quit rate in the comparator intervention (0.04 for brief advice and 0.10 for counselling), the 12-month quit rate of treatment is calculated: treated quit rate for brief advice+NRT: 0.0650 treated quit rate for brief advice+Buproprion: 0.0805 treated quit rate for brief advice+Buproprion+NRT: 0.0994 treated quit rate for counselling+NRT: 0.1565 treated quit rate for counselling+Buproprion: 0.1892 treated quit rate for counselling+Buproprion+NRT: 0.2275 spontaneous cessation rate: 0.01. lifetime relapse rate: 40% (range 30-50%). number of LYG per quitter: 2 (range 1-3). number of QALYs gained per quitter: 2.7 (range 1.35-4.05) not reported The table gives an overview of the assumptions with respect to costs and effects (quit rates) in the average scenario.
Odds ratio of NRT versus control: 1.67 Odds ratio of bupropion versus control: 2.1 Odds ratio of NRT+bupropion versus control: 2.65 From these Odds Ratios and information on the control 12-month quit rate in the comparator intervention (0.04 for brief advice and 0.10 for counselling), the 12-month quit rate of treatment is calculated: treated quit rate for brief advice+NRT: 0.0650 treated quit rate for brief advice+bupropion: 0.0805 treated quit rate for brief advice+bupropion+NRT: 0.0994 treated quit rate for counselling+NRT: 0.1565 treated quit rate for counselling+bupropion: 0.1892 treated quit rate for counselling+bupropion+NRT: 0.2275 spontaneous cessation rate: 0.01. lifetime relapse rate: 40% (range 30-50%). number of LYG per quitter: 2 (range 1-3). number of QALYs gained per quitter: 2.7 (range 1.35-4.05) not reported The table gives an overview of the assumptions with respect to costs and effects (quit rates) in the average scenario.

patients remain on one type of treatment throughout their smoking cessation therapy costs and consequences of side-effects of Buproprion or NRT were not taken into account
patients remain on one type of treatment throughout their smoking cessation therapy costs and consequences of side-effects of bupropion or NRT were not taken into account