Fabrizio Schettini

Background/Objectives: European healthcare systems are increasingly adopting automation technologies to improve efficiency. This study evaluates the economic viability of hospital automation and medication management digitalization. Methods: An economic evaluation was based on a standardized hospital model comprising 561 beds, representative of an average acute care hospital across EU27 + UK. For each technology, several cost items were estimated using country-specific parameters such as labor costs, medication error rates, healthcare expenditure, and money discount rate. The financial metrics (Return On Investment—ROI, Net Present Value—NPV, Payback Time—PBT) were first calculated at the hospital level. These results were then extrapolated to the national level by scaling the per-hospital estimates according to the total number of hospital beds reported in each country. Finally, national results were aggregated to derive the overall European impact. Results: The analysis estimated a total European investment of EUR 3.55 billion, with an average PBT of 4.46 years and annual savings of 1,96 billion. ROI averaged 167%, and the total NPV was 8.21 billion. A major saving driver was the reduction in Medication Administration Errors that has an impact of 37.2% on the total savings. Payback times ranged from 3 years in high-GDP countries, to 7 years in lower-GDP nations. Conclusions: These findings demonstrate how providing structured data on hospital automation benefits could support decision-making processes, highlighting the organizational and economic feasibility of the investment across different European national contexts.

Chronic RhinoSinusitis with Nasal Polyps (CRSwNP) represents a condition mainly caused by the type 2 inflammation presence and marked by the existence of polyps within the nasal and paranasal sinuses. The standard of care includes intranasal steroids, additional burst of systemic steroids, if needed, and surgery. However, recurrence is common, especially among patients with comorbid type 2 inflammatory diseases. Recently, biological drugs, addressing the underlying cause of the disease, have been approved in Italy (dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab). A Health Technology Assessment was conducted to define multidimensional impact, assuming Italian NHS perspective and a 12-month time horizon. The EUnetHTA Core Model was deployed, using the following methods to analyze the domains: (i) literature evidence; (ii) administration of semi-structured questionnaires to 17 healthcare professionals; (iii) health economics tools to define the economic sustainability for the system. Evidence from NMA and ITC showed a more favorable safety profile and better efficacy for dupilumab compared with alternative biologics. All the analyses, synthesizing cost and efficacy measures, showed that dupilumab is the preferable alternative. Specifically, the cost per responder analysis for dupilumab, exhibiting a 67.0% response rate at Week 52, is notably economical at 14,209EUR per responder. This presents a more economical profile compared with the cost per responder for omalizumab (36.2% response rate) at 24,999EUR and mepolizumab (28.5% response rate) at 31,863EUR. These results underscore dupilumab’s potential, not merely in terms of clinical outcomes, but also in terms of economic rationality, thereby solidifying its status as a valid and preferrable alternative in the management of CRSwNP, in the context of the Italian NHS.

Drug distribution performed through hospital pharmacies facilitates public expenditure savings but incurs higher social costs for patients and caregivers. The widespread presence of community pharmacies could support patient access while also improving drug distribution. The implementation of prescriptive data analyses as constrained optimization to achieve specific objectives, could be also applied with good results in the healthcare context. Assuming the perspective of the Italian National Healthcare Service, the present study, built upon existing research in this field, proposes a decision support tool that is able to define which self-administered drugs for chronic diseases should be distributed by community pharmacies, answering to critical challenges in the case of future pandemics and healthcare emergencies, while also providing suggestions for the institutional decision-making process. Moreover, the tool aids in determining the optimal setup of the drug distribution network, comparing centralized (hospital pharmacies) and decentralized (community pharmacies) approaches, as well as their economic and social implications.

To date, at least 2.41 billion people with Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) are in need of rehabilitation. Rehabilitation care through innovative technologies is the ideal candidate to reach all people with NCDs in need. To obtain these innovative solutions available in the public health system calls for a rigorous multidimensional evaluation that, with an articulated approach, is carried out through the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) methodology. In this context, the aim of the present paper is to illustrate how the Smart&TouchID (STID) model addresses the need to incorporate patients’ evaluations into a multidimensional technology assessment framework by presenting a feasibility study of model application with regard to the rehabilitation experiences of people living with NCDs. After sketching out the STID model’s vision and operational process, preliminary evidence on the experiences and attitudes of patients and citizens on rehabilitation care will be described and discussed, showing how they operate, enabling the co-design of technological solutions with a multi-stakeholder approach. Implications for public health are discussed including the view on the STID model as a tool to be integrated into public health governance strategies aimed at tuning the agenda-setting of innovation in rehabilitation care through a participatory methodology.

Purpose: To investigate the glycated albumin (GA) introduction implications, as an add-on strategy to traditional glycemic control (Hb1Ac and fasting plasma glucose – FPG) instruments, considering insulin-naïve individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), treated with oral therapies. Methods: A Health Technology Assessment was conducted in Italy, as a multi-dimensional approach useful to validate any innovative technology. The HTA dimensions, derived from the EUnetHTA Core Model, were deployed by means of literature evidence, health economics tools and qualitative questionnaires, filled-in by 15 professionals. Results: Literature stated that the GA introduction could lead to a higher number of individuals achieving therapeutic success after 3 months of therapy (97.0% vs 71.6% without GA). From an economic point of view, considering a projection of 1,955,447 T2DM insulin-naïve individuals, potentially treated with oral therapy, GA introduction would imply fewer individuals requiring a therapy switch (− 89.44%), with a 1.06% in costs reduction, on annual basis, thus being also the preferable solution from a cost-effectiveness perspective (cost-effectiveness value: 237.74 vs 325.53). According to experts opinions, lower perceptions on GA emerged with regard to equity aspects (0.13 vs 0.72, p-value> 0.05), whereas it would improve both individuals (2.17 vs 1.33, p-value=0.000) and caregivers quality of life (1.50 vs 0.83, p-value=0.000). Even if in the short term, GA required additional investments in training courses (− 0.80 vs 0.10, p-value = 0.036), in the long run, GA could become the preferable technology (0.30 vs 0.01, p-value=0.018) from an organisational perspective. Conclusion: Adding GA to traditional glycaemic control instruments could improve the clinical pathway of individuals with T2DM, leading to economic and organisational advantages for both hospitals and National Healthcare Systems.

Purpose: To evaluate the incremental benefits concerning the implementation of closed-system medical devices for the preparation and administration of chemotherapy agents (integrated or not with traceable workflow), within an Italian clinical practice, in which the use of such technologies is not standardized. Methodology: Four Scenarios, implying different levels of technologies introduction, were analyzed, based on the presence and/or absence of closed systems and traceable workflow, in the preparation and in the administration phase. A literature review was conducted, in order to retrieve efficacy and safety measures. Economic and organizational benefits, assuming a hospitals perspective, were assessed by means of health-economics tools, considering 27,660 (± 695.86) drugs on average prepared, on an annual basis, by 12 hospitals involved. The typology of medical devices and other devices/equipment used, the human resources involved, and the time spent for the preparation and administration phases were collected. Results: Literature stated that the introduction of advanced technologies (CSTDs in the preparation phase, closed-system in the administration phase, both integrated by a traceable workflow) could: i) decrease surface contamination (12.24% vs 26.39%, P< 0.001) and ii) improve the capability to identify dosage errors (7% vs 0.096%, P< 0.05). The above technologies presented the best trade-off between cost sustained and efficacy gained. Despite marginal investments (ranging from +1% to +6%) being required for their acquisition, an organizational saving equal to more than 1,000 working hours emerged, which could be spent on other hospital activities. Conclusion: The implementation of closed systems, integrated with a traceable workflow grounding on gravimetric control, may be considered a valid technological alternative within the investigated setting. The marginal incremental costs could be absorbed already in the first year after their introduction, in particular, because of the potential time saving in using closed systems in both the preparation and administration phases, demonstrating the sustainability and feasibility of such advanced technologies.