The economic burden of migraine is substantial; determining the cost that migraine imposes on the Canadian healthcare system is needed.

Administrative data were used to identify adults living with migraine, including chronic migraine (CM) and episodic migraine (EM), and matched controls in Alberta, Canada. One- and two-part generalized linear models with gamma distribution were used to estimate direct healthcare costs (hospitalization, emergency department, ambulatory care, physician visit, prescription medication; reported in 2022 Canadian dollars) of migraine during a 1-year observation period (2017/2018).

The fully adjusted total mean healthcare cost of migraine (n = 100,502) was 1.5 times (cost ratio: 1.53 [95% CI: 1.50, 1.55]) higher versus matched controls (n = 301,506), with a predicted annual incremental cost of $2,806 (95% CI: $2,664, $2,948) per person. The predicted annual incremental cost of CM and EM was $5,059 (95% CI: $4,836, $5,283) and $669 (95% CI: $512, $827) per person, respectively, compared with matched controls. All healthcare cost categories were greater for migraine (overall, CM and EM) compared with matched controls, with prescription medication the primary cost driver (incremental cost – overall: $1,381 [95% CI: $1,234, $1,529]; CM: $2,057 [95% CI: %1,891, $2,223]; EM: $414 [95% CI: $245, $583] per person per year).

Persons living with migraine had greater direct healthcare costs than those without. With an estimated migraine prevalence of 8.3%–10.2%, this condition may account for an additional $1.05–1.29 billion in healthcare costs per year in Alberta. Strategies to prevent and effectively manage migraine and associated healthcare costs are needed.

The incidence of facial palsy has been rising worldwide, with recent evidence emerging of links to COVID-19 infection. To date, guidance on cost-effective treatments is limited to medication (prednisolone). In terms of physical therapy, neuromuscular retraining (NMR) to restore balanced facial function has been most widely evaluated, but not in terms of cost effectiveness. The added value of telerehabilitation is unknown.

A multistage technology assessment was conducted, which included the following:

• • a national survey of current therapy pathways in the UK and patients’ and clinicians’ views on the benefits and challenges of telerehabilitation;

• • a systematic review of clinical effectiveness trials evaluating facial NMR therapy;

• • calculation of long-term morbidity costs (national economic burden) based on incidence, patient recovery profiles, health-related quality of life, and national facial palsy treatment costs (valuation of clinical improvements in monetary terms was provided by a national Delphi panel); and

• • evaluation of the cost effectiveness of telerehabilitation (remote monitoring wearables) added to current face-to-face NMR delivery.

Nationally, approximately five percent of patients with facial palsy (17% of unresolved cases) are referred for facial NMR. The long-term economic burden associated with unresolved cases is estimated to range from GBP351 (EUR417) to GBP584 (EUR692) million, indicating substantial savings if long-term recovery can be improved. Medical treatment costs are GBP86.34 (EUR102) million per annual cohort, and physical and psychological therapy costs are GBP643,292 (EUR762,561). Economic modeling showed that telerehabilitation was cost effective, producing a health gain and a cost-saving of GBP468 (EUR555) per patient. If scaled to the national level for all patients who do not recover fully, an annual saving of GBP3.075 (EUR3.65) million is possible.

Economic modeling indicates that NMR could improve patient outcomes and reduce costs. The national survey demonstrated that access to NMR therapy services is limited, so introduction of telerehabilitation could improve access for currently underserved populations. Future clinical trials need to incorporate economic evaluations to help inform decision-making.

In responding to a Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear explosive (CBRNe) disaster, clinical leaders have important decision-making responsibilities which include implementing hospital disaster protocols or incident command systems, managing staffing, and allocating resources. Despite emergency care clinical leaders’ integral role, there is minimal literature regarding the strategies they may use during CBRNe disasters. The aim of this study was to explore emergency care clinical leaders’ strategies related to managing patients following a CBRNe disaster.

Focus groups across 5 tertiary hospitals and 1 rural hospital in Queensland, Australia. Thirty-six hospital clinical leaders from the 6 study sites crucial to hospital disaster response participated in 6 focus groups undertaken between February and May 2021 that explored strategies and decision making to optimize patient care following a CBRNe disaster.

Analysis revealed the use of rehearsals, adopting new models of care, enacting current surge management processes, and applying organization lessons were facilitating strategies. Barriers to management were identified, including resource constraints and sites operating over capacity.

Enhanced education and training of clinical leaders, flexible models of care, and existing established processes and tested frameworks could strengthen a hospital’s response when managing patients following a CBRNe disaster.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we rapidly implemented a plasma coordination center, within two months, to support transfusion for two outpatient randomized controlled trials. The center design was based on an investigational drug services model and a Food and Drug Administration-compliant database to manage blood product inventory and trial safety.

A core investigational team adapted a cloud-based platform to randomize patient assignments and track inventory distribution of control plasma and high-titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma of different blood groups from 29 donor collection centers directly to blood banks serving 26 transfusion sites.

We performed 1,351 transfusions in 16 months. The transparency of the digital inventory at each site was critical to facilitate qualification, randomization, and overnight shipments of blood group-compatible plasma for transfusions into trial participants. While inventory challenges were heightened with COVID-19 convalescent plasma, the cloud-based system, and the flexible approach of the plasma coordination center staff across the blood bank network enabled decentralized procurement and distribution of investigational products to maintain inventory thresholds and overcome local supply chain restraints at the sites.

The rapid creation of a plasma coordination center for outpatient transfusions is infrequent in the academic setting. Distributing more than 3,100 plasma units to blood banks charged with managing investigational inventory across the U.S. in a decentralized manner posed operational and regulatory challenges while providing opportunities for the plasma coordination center to contribute to research of global importance. This program can serve as a template in subsequent public health emergencies.

Understanding post-stroke spasticity (PSS) treatment in everyday clinical practice may guide improvements in patient care.

This was a retrospective cohort study that used population-level administrative data. Adults (aged ≥18 years) who initiated PSS treatment (defined by the first PSS clinic visit, focal botulinum toxin injection, or anti-spasticity medication dispensation [baclofen, dantrolene and tizanidine] with none of these treatments occurring during the 2 years before the stroke) were identified between 2012 and 2019 in Alberta, Canada. Spasticity treatment use, time to treatment start and type of prescribing/treating physician were measured. Descriptive statistics were performed.

Within the cohort (n = 1,079), the most common PSS treatment was oral baclofen (initial treatment: 60.9%; received on/after the initial treatment date up to March 31, 2020: 69.0%), largely prescribed by primary care physicians (77.6%) and started a median of 348 (IQR 741) days after the stroke. Focal botulinum toxin (23.3%; 37.7%) was largely prescribed by physiatrists (72.2%) and started 311 (IQR 446) days after the stroke; spasticity clinic visits (18.6%; 23.8%) were also common.

We found evidence of gaps in provision of spasticity management in persons with PSS including overuse of systemic oral baclofen (that has common adverse side effects and lacks evidence of effectiveness in PSS) and potential underuse of focal botulinum toxin injections. Further investigation and strategies should be pursued to improve alignment of PSS treatment with guideline recommendations that in turn will support better outcomes for those with PSS.

Recruitment of participants into research studies remains a major concern for investigators. Using clinical teams to identify potentially eligible patients can present a significant barrier. To overcome this, we implemented a process for using our patient portal, called MyChart, as a new institutional recruitment option utilizing our electronic health record’s existing functionality.

To streamline the institutional approval process, we established a working group comprised of representatives from human subject protection, information technology, and privacy and vetted our process with many stakeholder groups. Our specific process for study approval is described and started with a consultation with our recruitment and retention function funded through our Clinical and Translational Science Award.

The time from consultation to the first message(s) sent ranged from 84 to 442 days and declined slightly over time. The overall patient response rate to MyChart messages about available research studies was 23% with one third of those saying they were interested in learning more. The response rate for Black and Hispanic patients was about 50% that of White patients.

Many different types of studies from any medical specialty successfully identified interested patients using this option. Study teams needed support in defining appropriate inclusion/exclusion criteria to identify the relevant population in the electronic health records and they needed assistance writing study descriptions in plain language. Using MyChart for recruitment addressed a critical barrier and opened up the opportunity to provide a full recruitment consultation to identify additional recruitment channels the study teams would not have considered otherwise.

We aimed to (1) report updated estimates of direct healthcare costs for people living with MS (pwMS), (2) contrast costs to a control population and (3) explore differences between disability levels among pwMS.

Administrative data were used to identify adult pwMS (MS cohort) and without (control cohort) in Alberta, Canada; disability level (based on the Expanded Disability Status Scale) among pwMS was estimated. One- and two-part generalized linear models with gamma distribution were used to estimate the incremental direct healthcare cost (2021 $CDN) of MS during a 1-year observation period.

Adjusting for confounders, the total healthcare cost ratio was higher in the MS cohort (n = 13,089) versus control (n = 150,080) (5.24 [95% CI: 5.08, 5.41]) with a predicted incremental cost of $15,016 (95% CI: $14,497, $15,535) per person-year. Among the MS cohort, total predicted direct healthcare costs were higher with greater disability, $14,430 (95% CI: $13,980, $14,880) to $58,697 ($51,514, $65,879) per person-year in mild and severe disability, respectively. The primary health resource cost component shifted from disease-modifying therapies in mild disability to supportive care in moderate and severe disability.

Adult pwMS had greater direct healthcare costs than those without. Extrapolating to the population level (where 14,485 adult pwMS were identified in the study), it is estimated that $218 million per year in healthcare costs may be attributable to MS in Alberta. The significantly larger economic impact associated with greater disability underscores the importance of preventing or delaying disease progression and functional impairment in MS.