Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Federica Romano is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Federica Romano.


International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care | 2016

COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS OF HERPES ZOSTER VACCINATION IN ITALIAN ELDERLY PERSONS.

Silvia Coretti; Paola Codella; Federica Romano; Matteo Ruggeri; Americo Cicchetti

OBJECTIVES Herpes zoster (HZ) is characterized by a painful skin rash. Its main complication is postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), pain persisting or occurring after the rash onset. HZ treatment aims to reduce acute pain, impede the onset complications, and disease progression. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of HZ vaccination compared with no vaccination strategy, within the Italian context. METHODS The natural history of HZ and PHN was mapped through a Markov model with lifetime horizon. A population of patients aged between 60 and 79 years was hypothesized. Third party payer (Italian National Health Service, I-NHS) and societal perspectives were adopted. Data were derived from literature. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the vaccination equaled EUR 11,943 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) under the I-NHS perspective and EUR 11,248 per QALY under the societal perspective. Considering a cost-effectiveness threshold of EUR 30,000/QALY, the multi-way sensitivity analysis showed that vaccination is cost-effective regardless of the perspective adopted, in 99 percent of simulations.


Blood Transfusion | 2016

Health Technology Assessment of pathogen reduction technologies applied to plasma for clinical use.

Americo Cicchetti; Alexandra Berrino; Marina Casini; Paola Codella; Giuseppina Facco; Alessandra Fiore; Giuseppe Marano; Marco Marchetti; Emanuela Midolo; Roberta Minacori; Pietro Refolo; Federica Romano; Matteo Ruggeri; Dario Sacchini; Antonio Gioacchino Spagnolo; Irene Urbina; Stefania Vaglio; Giuliano Grazzini; Giancarlo M. Liumbruno

Although existing clinical evidence shows that the transfusion of blood components is becoming increasingly safe, the risk of transmission of known and unknown pathogens, new pathogens or re-emerging pathogens still persists. Pathogen reduction technologies may offer a new approach to increase blood safety. The study is the output of collaboration between the Italian National Blood Centre and the Post-Graduate School of Health Economics and Management, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy. A large, multidisciplinary team was created and divided into six groups, each of which addressed one or more HTA domains.Plasma treated with amotosalen + UV light, riboflavin + UV light, methylene blue or a solvent/detergent process was compared to fresh-frozen plasma with regards to current use, technical features, effectiveness, safety, economic and organisational impact, and ethical, social and legal implications. The available evidence is not sufficient to state which of the techniques compared is superior in terms of efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness. Evidence on efficacy is only available for the solvent/detergent method, which proved to be non-inferior to untreated fresh-frozen plasma in the treatment of a wide range of congenital and acquired bleeding disorders. With regards to safety, the solvent/detergent technique apparently has the most favourable risk-benefit profile. Further research is needed to provide a comprehensive overview of the cost-effectiveness profile of the different pathogen-reduction techniques. The wide heterogeneity of results and the lack of comparative evidence are reasons why more comparative studies need to be performed.


Hepatology | 2017

Modelling cost-effectiveness and health gains of a "universal" vs. "prioritized" HCV treatment policy in a real-life cohort

Loreta A. Kondili; Federica Romano; Francesca Romana Rolli; Matteo Ruggeri; Stefano Rosato; Maurizia Rossana Brunetto; Anna Linda Zignego; Alessia Ciancio; Alfredo Di Leo; Giovanni Raimondo; Carlo Ferrari; Gloria Taliani; Guglielmo Borgia; T. Santantonio; Pierluigi Blanc; Giovanni Battista Gaeta; Antonio Gasbarrini; Luchino Chessa; Elke M. Erne; Erica Villa; Donatella Ieluzzi; Francesco Russo; Pietro Andreone; M. Vinci; Carmine Coppola; Liliana Chemello; S. Madonia; Gabriella Verucchi; Marcello Persico; Massimo Zuin

We evaluated the cost‐effectiveness of two alternative direct‐acting antiviral (DAA) treatment policies in a real‐life cohort of hepatitis C virus–infected patients: policy 1, “universal,” treat all patients, regardless of fibrosis stage; policy 2, treat only “prioritized” patients, delay treatment of the remaining patients until reaching stage F3. A liver disease progression Markov model, which used a lifetime horizon and health care system perspective, was applied to the PITER cohort (representative of Italian hepatitis C virus–infected patients in care). Specifically, 8,125 patients naive to DAA treatment, without clinical, sociodemographic, or insurance restrictions, were used to evaluate the policies’ cost‐effectiveness. The patients’ age and fibrosis stage, assumed DAA treatment cost of €15,000/patient, and the Italian liver disease costs were used to evaluate quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALY) and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICER) of policy 1 versus policy 2. To generalize the results, a European scenario analysis was performed, resampling the study population, using the mean European country‐specific health states costs and mean treatment cost of €30,000. For the Italian base‐case analysis, the cost‐effective ICER obtained using policy 1 was €8,775/QALY. ICERs remained cost‐effective in 94%‐97% of the 10,000 probabilistic simulations. For the European treatment scenario the ICER obtained using policy 1 was €19,541.75/QALY. ICER was sensitive to variations in DAA costs, in the utility value of patients in fibrosis stages F0‐F3 post–sustained virological response, and in the transition probabilities from F0 to F3. The ICERs decrease with decreasing DAA prices, becoming cost‐saving for the base price (€15,000) discounts of at least 75% applied in patients with F0‐F2 fibrosis.


Hepatology | 2017

Modeling cost-effectiveness and health gains of a “universal” versus “prioritized” hepatitis C virus treatment policy in a real-life cohort

Loreta A. Kondili; Federica Romano; Francesca Romana Rolli; Matteo Ruggeri; Stefano Rosato; Maurizia Rossana Brunetto; Anna Linda Zignego; Alessia Ciancio; Alfredo Di Leo; Giovanni Raimondo; Carlo Ferrari; Gloria Taliani; Guglielmo Borgia; T. Santantonio; Pierluigi Blanc; Giovanni Battista Gaeta; Antonio Gasbarrini; Luchino Chessa; Elke M. Erne; Erica Villa; Donatella Ieluzzi; Francesco Russo; Pietro Andreone; M. Vinci; Carmine Coppola; Liliana Chemello; Salvatore Madonia; Gabriella Verucchi; Marcello Persico; Massimo Zuin

We evaluated the cost‐effectiveness of two alternative direct‐acting antiviral (DAA) treatment policies in a real‐life cohort of hepatitis C virus–infected patients: policy 1, “universal,” treat all patients, regardless of fibrosis stage; policy 2, treat only “prioritized” patients, delay treatment of the remaining patients until reaching stage F3. A liver disease progression Markov model, which used a lifetime horizon and health care system perspective, was applied to the PITER cohort (representative of Italian hepatitis C virus–infected patients in care). Specifically, 8,125 patients naive to DAA treatment, without clinical, sociodemographic, or insurance restrictions, were used to evaluate the policies’ cost‐effectiveness. The patients’ age and fibrosis stage, assumed DAA treatment cost of €15,000/patient, and the Italian liver disease costs were used to evaluate quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALY) and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICER) of policy 1 versus policy 2. To generalize the results, a European scenario analysis was performed, resampling the study population, using the mean European country‐specific health states costs and mean treatment cost of €30,000. For the Italian base‐case analysis, the cost‐effective ICER obtained using policy 1 was €8,775/QALY. ICERs remained cost‐effective in 94%‐97% of the 10,000 probabilistic simulations. For the European treatment scenario the ICER obtained using policy 1 was €19,541.75/QALY. ICER was sensitive to variations in DAA costs, in the utility value of patients in fibrosis stages F0‐F3 post–sustained virological response, and in the transition probabilities from F0 to F3. The ICERs decrease with decreasing DAA prices, becoming cost‐saving for the base price (€15,000) discounts of at least 75% applied in patients with F0‐F2 fibrosis.


Risk Management and Healthcare Policy | 2015

Economic evaluation of screening programs for hepatitis C virus infection: evidence from literature

Silvia Coretti; Federica Romano; Valentina Orlando; Paola Codella; Sabrina Prete; Eugenio Di Brino; Matteo Ruggeri

Background Hepatitis C is a liver infection caused by hepatitis C virus. Its main complications are cirrhosis and liver cancer. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), more than 185 million people worldwide are infected with hepatitis C virus and, of these, 350,000 die every year. Due to the high disease prevalence and the existence of effective (and expensive) medical treatments able to dramatically change the prognosis, early detection programs can potentially prevent the development of serious chronic conditions, improve health, and save resources. Objective To summarize the available evidence on the cost-effectiveness of screening programs for hepatitis C. Methods A literature search was performed on PubMed and Scopus search engines. Trip database was queried to identify reports produced by the major Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies. Three reviewers dealt with study selection and data extraction blindly. Results Ten papers eventually met the inclusion criteria. In studies focusing on asymptomatic cohorts of individuals at general risk the cost/quality adjusted life year of screening programs ranged between US


International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery | 2016

Use of robot-specific resources and operating room times: the case of Telelap Alf-X robotic hysterectomy

Cristiano Rossitto; Salvatore Gueli Alletti; Federica Romano; Alessandra Fiore; Silvia Coretti; Marco Oradei; Matteo Ruggeri; Americo Cicchetti; Marco Marchetti; Francesco Fanfani; Giovanni Scambia

4,200 and


Value in Health | 2015

Investigating the Generalizability of Economic Evaluations Conducted in Italy: A Critical Review

Matteo Ruggeri; Andrea Manca; Silvia Coretti; Paola Codella; Valentina Iacopino; Federica Romano; Daniele Mascia; Valentina Orlando; Americo Cicchetti

50,000/quality adjusted life year gained, while in those focusing on specific risk factors the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ranged between


Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research | 2015

Economic assessment of eltrombopag in the treatment of thrombocytopenia

Federica Romano; Matteo Ruggeri; Silvia Coretti; Edoardo Giovanni Giannini; Dario Sacchini; Brigida Eleonora Annichiarico; Marco Marchetti; Francesco Rodeghiero; Dario Lidonnici

848 and


Value in Health | 2017

Economic Evaluation of the HCV Treatment Extension to Early-Stage Fibrosis Patients: Evidence from the PITER Real-World Cohort

Matteo Ruggeri; Silvia Coretti; Federica Romano; Loreta A. Kondili; Stefano Vella; Americo Cicchetti

128,424/quality adjusted life year gained. Age of the target population and disease prevalence were the main cost-effectiveness drivers. Conclusion Our results suggest that, especially in the long run, screening programs represent a cost-effective strategy for the management of hepatitis C.


International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care | 2016

Economic assessment of Zostavax vaccine for the prevention of Herpes Zoster

Matteo Ruggeri; Silvia Coretti; Federica Romano; Americo Cicchetti

The aim of this study was to identify, quantify and evaluate the use of robotic materials and operating theatre times in Telelap ALF‐X robotic hysterectomy.

Collaboration


Dive into the Federica Romano's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Matteo Ruggeri

Catholic University of the Sacred Heart

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Silvia Coretti

Catholic University of the Sacred Heart

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Americo Cicchetti

Catholic University of the Sacred Heart

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Marco Marchetti

Catholic University of the Sacred Heart

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Paola Codella

Catholic University of the Sacred Heart

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Dario Sacchini

Catholic University of the Sacred Heart

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Alessandra Fiore

Catholic University of the Sacred Heart

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Loreta A. Kondili

Istituto Superiore di Sanità

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Valentina Orlando

University of Naples Federico II

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge