SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Payers”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,045 records · Page 58Linked to original sources

PubMed2007

Basic terminology in obtaining reimbursement for pharmacists' cognitive services.

PURPOSE: A basic overview and definitions of commonly used billing and reimbursement terminology that pharmacists will need to know to obtain reimbursement for cognitive services are provided. SUMMARY: Currently, the profession of pharmacy has been gathering momentum in its efforts to seek and obtain reimbursement for cognitive services. However, there have been major barriers in seeking reimbursement, including the lack of understanding by third-party payers of the pharmacist's role in patient care and the pharmacist's in-depth knowledge of pharmacotherapy, the lack of appropriate billing codes for pharmacists' services, and the lack of detailed knowledge and understanding by pharmacy practitioners of nondistributive reimbursement mechanisms, processes, and terminology. The types of services provided are usually described by the American Medical Association's Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for the face-to-face provision of patient care services by a pharmacist. As of January 1, 2006, pharmacists have been able to indicate the appropriate diagnosis code from the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision (ICD-9) (ICD-10 will replace the ICD-9 on October 1, 2007), and CPT code when billing under a major medical plan that recognizes the pharmacist as a patient care service provider. Understanding the billing and reimbursement terminology will aid pharmacist communication with third-party payers, Medicare, and Medicaid. A glossary of the most commonly encountered terms in billing and reimbursement procedures for cognitive services is provided. Also included are lists of Web-based reimbursement resources and references on reimbursement for cognitive services by the pharmacist. CONCLUSION: An understanding of terminology is important in receiving reimbursement for cognitive services.

Drug Therapy↗

PubMed1994

Using cost-effectiveness analysis for formulary decision making: from theory into practice.

The growth of expenditures on healthcare and pharmaceutical products is a concern to third-party payers because of the absence of market discipline (price signals that consumers face). Cost-effectiveness analysis is a method that allows third-party payers to systematically make judgements about the 'value for money' of these products. It moves beyond simple unit price comparisons of alternate interventions/products to consider the full stream of relevant cost and benefits. As formulary committees begin to adopt the systematic use of cost-effectiveness analyses to inform the debate, the exercise will move from an academic to a more practical application. This transition will require several important changes including defining the purpose of cost-effectiveness analysis, measurement of outcomes and data, format of reports, and contractual arrangements between the pharmaceutical industry and analysts. As more 'real world' experience is gained in the practical application of cost-effectiveness analysis, the quality of data will improve as will its value as an aid to decision making.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗

PubMed1995

Cost and quality effects of treating erosive oesophagitis. A re-evaluation.

The objective of this study was to re-evaluate the clinical and economic effects of common therapies for erosive oesophagitis in the light of a newly approved treatment regimen. A previously constructed 7-month community practice decision analytical model was revised to include the latest published data on efficacy and symptomatic outcomes. The original results of phase I therapy (antacids plus dietary, sleeping and lifestyle changes) alone or combined with ranitidine 150mg bid or omeprazole 20mg od were reassessed by adding new clinical data on the efficacy of and symptomatic response to ranitidine 150mg qid. The same payment data used in the first analysis were applied here as well, with the addition of the US price of ranitidine 150mg qid. The study perspective was that of the payer or insurer. Omeprazole-based therapy remained a dominant strategy for symptomatic care during the 7-month model. It was 14% less costly per patient, led to 23% fewer symptomatic months, and had 21% lower cost per symptom-free month than ranitidine 150mg qid, the next best alternative. Evolving treatment strategies necessitate rapid assessment and reassessment so that clinical practice can remain current, patients can be assured of the best quality, and insurers can be aware of treatment cost and budgetary impact given limited resources in all countries. Only by consistent and continuous re-evaluation of new or changing medical interventions can clinicians and insurers adapt patient management to new scientifically derived results. This is the best manner by which to meet patients' care needs and the clinical needs of practitioners, as well as the financial needs of payers.

Antacids↗

PubMed1997

Azithromycin. A pharmacoeconomic review of its use as a single-dose regimen in the treatment of uncomplicated urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women.

In women, Chlamydia trachomatis infection often occurs in the urethra or cervix, with up to 70% of infections associated with few or no symptoms. Inadequate treatment may lead to infection of the upper genital tract and subsequent pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) in 10 to 40% of patients. PID causes an increased relative risk of ectopic pregnancy of 2.5 to 7.9 and PID may also lead to tubal infertility in about 17% of patients. 60% of infants born of mothers with C. trachomatis infection may become infected, leading to conjunctivitis in 23% and pneumonia in 21%. All of these sequelae of C. trachomatis infection may require in- or outpatient treatment. With > 4 million infections estimated to occur each year in the US, C. trachomatis is one of the most common and costly of the sexually transmitted pathogens. Treatment options for uncomplicated C. trachomatis infections in nonpregnant women include single-dose azithromycin 1000 mg or doxycycline 100 mg twice daily for 7 days orally. In clinical trials, the bacteriological cure rate of single dose azithromycin 1000 mg (95 to 100%) was similar to that of oral doxycycline 200 mg/day for 7 days (88 to 100%) in nonpregnant women. Azithromycin was at least as well tolerated as doxycycline and was associated with mainly mild gastrointestinal adverse effects including diarrhoea, nausea and abdominal pain. Pharmacoeconomic analyses have sought to determine if the 2.7- to 12-fold higher acquisition costs of azithromycin in comparison with doxycycline are offset by its simple single-dose regimen which is likely to aid patient compliance and so optimise drug efficacy. All analyses were retrospective cost-effectiveness decision-tree models and mainly considered direct costs. All models incorporated an estimate of noncompliance with doxycycline and its influence on efficacy. For the treatment of confirmed C. trachomatis infection, azithromycin saved around $US1200 per major outcome avoided (1993 values; third-party payer perspective in the US) or US$3502 per case of PID avoided (1993 values; US healthcare system perspective) compared with doxycycline. If infection was treated empirically, azithromycin was more costly than doxycycline by $US792 (1993 values), but the result was sensitive to changes of some parameters of the model. Azithromycin was more costly than doxycycline from the perspective of a public health clinic which paid for the treatment of initial infection and acute sequelae only. Thus, pharmacoeconomic data from the US support the use of azithromycin in the treatment of nonpregnant women with confirmed C. trachomatis urogenital infections from the perspective of the healthcare system or third-party payer; however, from the perspective of a public clinic, doxycycline is the less costly option. Decreases in doxycycline compliance or azithromycin acquisition cost are factors that favour azithromycin.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗

PubMed2001

Healthcare resource utilisation and costs of treating NSAID-associated gastrointestinal toxicity. A multinational perspective.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to perform an economic analysis of a new therapy in 11 countries (Australia, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK) to assess the cost of treating the gastrointestinal (GI) events associated with the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Estimates of GI event-related costs were based on the results of resource utilisation questionnaires. Resources required for the treatment and follow-up of GI events were identified and converted into costs from society and payer perspectives. RESULTS: From the perspective of society, the total per-event cost of managing GI-related events varies from $US51 to $US772 for GI discomfort, from $US108 to $US1100 for anaemia, from $US145 to $US1200 for ulcer and from $US1923 to $US5473 for serious GI events requiring hospitalisation. From the payer perspective, the total per-event cost varies from $US47 to $US680 for GI discomfort, from $US144 to $US762 for anaemia, from $US229 to $US795 for ulcer and from $US1787 to $US6729 for serious GI events requiring hospitalisation. The total cost is driven by hospital expenses for those events requiring hospital admission. For GI discomfort, physician consultations are generally the cost driver, whereas for ulcer and anaemia, cost is primarily driven by the rate of endoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Costs associated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-related GI events differ significantly across countries as a result of variations in resources consumed and price/tariff policies.

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal↗

PubMed2002

Economic value of thrombolysis with adjunctive abciximab in patients with subacute peripheral arterial occlusion.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors enhance thrombolysis in patients with acute coronary syndromes. This analysis evaluates the economic impact of abciximab, a GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor, as an adjunct to urokinase in peripheral artery occlusions of less than 6 weeks duration. STUDY DESIGN: A post-hoc economic analysis was performed using clinical data and inpatient resource utilisation derived from the prospective comparative phase II Platelet Receptor Antibodies in Order to Manage Peripheral Artery Thrombosis (PROMPT) pilot study. Study endpoints were amputation-free survival and survival without open surgery or major amputation after 90 days, and the rate of major complications at 30 days. PERSPECTIVE: Third-party payer and the societal perspective. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy patients with lower extremity thrombi were randomised (2 : 5 ratio) to urokinase plus placebo or to urokinase plus abciximab. Economically relevant data were retrospectively derived from the clinical study database from a specific evaluation of patient records and from expert opinion. RESULTS: From the viewpoint of the society, average total per-patient direct and indirect costs accruing over 3 months were more favourable for treatment with abciximab plus urokinase than for urokinase alone [9723 euros (EUR) vs EUR10 322; 2000 values], despite higher initial hospitalisation costs of the combination therapy. Abciximab plus urokinase was the dominant strategy at 3 months due to a clinically higher rate of survival without amputation or bypass surgery coupled with a lower average per-patient cost. From the perspective of the third-party payer, treatment with abciximab plus urokinase was economically also superior to urokinase alone (EUR8773 vs EUR9663). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the preliminary findings of the PROMPT trial, the use of abciximab as an adjunct to urokinase in patients with subacute peripheral artery occlusions may be the favourable strategy compared with urokinase alone, in terms of clinical and economic outcomes. Further trials are needed to confirm these clinical and economic findings. The preliminary clinical benefits experienced by patients treated with abciximab plus urokinase in the PROMPT trial translated into cost savings in terms of reduced direct medical costs at 3 months. These cost savings more than offset the cost of abciximab. The use of abciximab as an adjunct to urokinase in patients with subacute peripheral artery occlusions may be the favourable strategy compared with urokinase-alone in terms of clinical and economic outcomes, but further trials are needed to confirm the these clinical and economic findings.

Abciximab↗

PubMed2002

Cost-effectiveness comparison of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate versus montelukast in the treatment of adults with persistent asthma.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the relative cost effectiveness of salmeterol (50 microg)/ fluticasone propionate (100 microg) with that of oral montelukast (10mg) as initial maintenance therapy in patients with persistent asthma uncontrolled on short-acting beta2-agonist therapy alone. STUDY DESIGN: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed based on effectiveness and resource utilisation data that was prospectively collected from a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, 12-week trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (>15 years of age) who had asthma for at least 6 months. Effectiveness measurements in this analysis included improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) and symptom-free days (SFDs). Cost of asthma drug treatment as well as costs related to an asthma exacerbation were used in the cost analysis. The study assumed a payer's perspective. All costs are in 2001 US dollars. RESULTS: Of the 423 patients eligible for the study, 211 were randomised to salmeterol/fluticasone propionate and 212 to montelukast. Treatment with salmeterol/fluticasone propionate resulted in a significantly higher proportion of patients who achieved a 12% increase in FEV(1) (successful treatment) [salmeterol/fluticasone propionate: 71% vs montelukast: 39%; p < 0.001] and percentage of SFDs (salmeterol/fluticasone propionate: 46.8% vs montelukast: 21.5%; p < 0.001) compared with montelukast. The mean daily costs per successfully treated patient were lower in the salmeterol/fluticasone propionate group (US dollars 5.03, 95% CI US dollars 4.61 to US dollars 5.50) compared with the montelukast group (US dollars 8.25, 95% CI US dollars 6.98 to US dollars 9.93). Furthermore, per patient mean daily cost per SFD was lower with salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (US dollars 7.63, 95% CI US dollars 6.90 to US dollars 8.50) compared with montelukast (US dollars 14.89, 95% CI US dollars 12.36 to US dollars 17.98). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) showed that the additional costs to achieve these benefits with salmeterol/fluticasone propionate were minimal. With regards to improvement in lung function, the ICER was US dollars 1.33 (95% CI US dollars 0.80 to US dollars 2.02) and with regards to SFD, the ICER was US dollars 1.69 (95% CI US dollars 1.01 to US dollars 2.48). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated the stability of the results over a range of assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: From a third-party payer perspective, this analysis shows that based on increased efficacy and only a slight increase in cost, twice-daily treatment with salmeterol/fluticasone propionate is more cost effective than once-daily treatment with montelukast as initial maintenance therapy for persistent asthma. This finding complements the results of the clinical analyses indicating that treatment of both inflammation and bronchoconstriction with products such as salmeterol/ fluticasone propionate may be more cost effective as initial maintenance asthma therapy than the use of leukotriene modifiers such as montelukast.

Acetates↗

PubMed2002

Galantamine: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in Alzheimer's disease.

Galantamine is one of several orally administered cholinesterase inhibitors that improve cognition in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. Compared with placebo, galantamine 16 or 24 mg/day improved cognition and activities of daily living, delayed emergence of behavioural symptoms and reduced caregiver burden in three pivotal randomised studies of 5 or 6 months' duration. Galantamine may reduce the considerable economic burden of Alzheimer's disease by delaying the need for full-time care (FTC) in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. In pharmacoeconomic analyses with a time horizon of 10 years conducted in Canada, Sweden, The Netherlands and the US, data from the pivotal trials were incorporated into a model to examine economic implications associated with galantamine treatment. FTC was defined in the model as the consistent requirement for caregiving and supervision for the greater part of each day regardless of the location of care and the identity of caregiver. When the effect of galantamine 16 or 24 mg/day was analysed from the perspective of a comprehensive healthcare payer, treatment was associated with cost savings (inclusive of drug costs) relative to no treatment, regardless of country for which the model was customised. Cost savings resulted from the delay in the time until FTC was required in patients with mild to moderate disease. In sensitivity analyses, cost savings were most sensitive to the cost of institutional care. In the analyses that considered the effect of galantamine 24 mg/day solely on cognition, galantamine was predicted to reduce the time FTC was required by approximately 10% in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease compared with no pharmacological treatment. Greater reductions in the time that FTC was required were predicted when the effects of galantamine 16 or 24 mg/day on behavioural symptoms in addition to cognition were considered in the US analysis or in sensitivity analyses in studies in other countries. In conclusion, pharmacoeconomic analyses, which were based on modelling of data from pivotal clinical trials with galantamine and included drug costs, indicate that galantamine treatment may result in cost savings from a healthcare payer perspective. The effects of galantamine on cognition and behavioural symptoms in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease are predicted to delay the need for FTC, which may result in cost savings. From a societal perspective, the caregiver burden of caring for a patient with Alzheimer's disease in the community may be decreased and the time that patients have without severe disease may be prolonged.

Alzheimer Disease↗

PubMed2003

Cost evaluation of basiliximab treatment for renal transplant patients in Japan.

BACKGROUND: International phase III studies (CHIB 201 and 352) showed that basiliximab, a high affinity chimeric monoclonal antibody interleukin-2 receptor antagonist, is highly effective in preventing acute rejection when used as immunoprophylaxis in patients receiving cyclosporin (Neoral). We conducted a cost evaluation by applying international clinical results to standard Japanese medical practice. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of basiliximab in renal transplant patients receiving conventional immunosuppressive therapy using cyclosporin and corticosteroids from the perspective of the healthcare payer in Japan. STUDY DESIGN: A decision tree model was developed, comprising seven pathways with key clinical events identified after the transplantation. The average first-year treatment costs after transplantation for patients treated with and without basiliximab were calculated using the model. A sensitivity analysis was done to measure the degree of influence of several criteria including the incidences of rejection, and rejection responding to steroid pulse therapy and antibody therapy. METHODS: Estimates of key clinical events were derived from the international studies. Calculation of direct medical costs were made from the payers' perspective, based on the Social Insurance Medical Fee Table in Japan. The cost of basiliximab was assumed as zero. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: Basiliximab use produced an estimated saving of 315,807 yen (2000 values) during the first year after transplantation. Reduced acute rejection treatment and dialysis most influenced the cost saving. The sensitivity analysis showed that the average cost for a patient was lower in the basiliximab group and that the model was effective within the plausible range of each criterion that would reflect renal transplantation in Japan. CONCLUSIONS: If the cost of basiliximab is less than 315,807 yen, the clinical and economic benefits of basiliximab in the first year after transplantation support the routine use of basiliximab in renal transplantation in Japan.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

A cost-effectiveness analysis of fondaparinux sodium compared with enoxaparin sodium as prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism: use in patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost effectiveness of fondaparinux sodium compared with enoxaparin sodium for prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery. METHODS: Using a cohort simulation model, two primary analyses were conducted from the perspective of the US healthcare payer. Probabilities for a trial-based analysis were obtained from patients participating in the fondaparinux clinical trial programme supplemented with data from published literature. Probabilities for a label-based analysis were estimated for a hypothetical cohort of US patients receiving either fondaparinux or enoxaparin as recommended by US FDA-approved labelling. Resource use and costs were obtained from large US healthcare databases. Outcome measures were rates of symptomatic thromboembolic events and healthcare costs. Costs were in 2003 values. RESULTS: In the trial-based analysis, fondaparinux was estimated to prevent 15.1 symptomatic venous thromboembolic events (per 1,000 patients) at 3 months for patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery compared with enoxaparin. The cost savings (per patient) of using fondaparinux over enoxaparin are US 61 dollars at 30 days, US 89 dollars at 3 months, and US 155 dollars at 5 years. In the label-based analysis, fondaparinux was estimated to prevent 17.8 venous thromboembolic events (per 1,000 patients) at 3 months compared with enoxaparin, producing savings per patient of US 25 dollars at discharge, US 112 dollars over 1 month, US 141 dollars over 3 months and US 234 dollars over 5 years. Results remain robust to clinically plausible variation in input parameters and assumptions. CONCLUSION: Our model suggests that fondaparinux, when compared with the current standard regimen of enoxaparin for prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in major orthopaedic surgery, improves outcomes and is cost saving from a US healthcare-payer perspective over the broad range of assumptions evaluated.

Aged↗

PubMed2004

Warfarin in the secondary prevention of thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation: impact of bioavailability on costs and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The bioavailability of warfarin is an important factor affecting the achievement of therapeutic anticoagulation. It is uncertain whether less expensive generic preparations of warfarin would compromise prevention of thromboembolism or increase bleeding risk in patients with atrial fibrillation. OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost effectiveness of strategies using warfarin products with variable bioavailability in patients with a prior stroke or transient ischaemic attack related to atrial fibrillation. DESIGN: A Markov decision-analytic model simulating health and economic outcomes over 1 year using the perspective of a government provincial payer was created. Four strategies were compared (where F = 1 is the assumed bioavailability of the branded/reference product): (i) warfarin F = 1; (ii) warfarin F = 1.25; (iii) warfarin F = 0.80; and (iv) alternating warfarin F = 1.25 and 0.80 every other month. Direct medical costs for drugs, physician fees, laboratory testing and hospitalisation for morbid events were obtained from a government payer, a local accounting system and the medical literature. The cost of warfarin F = 1 was equivalent to the cost of the brand name warfarin and the cost of warfarin F not equal 1 was equivalent to generic warfarin. RESULTS: In our institution, warfarin F = 1 was similar in cost to the other three strategies (Can dollars 1361 vs Can dollars 1334-1613) and may be more effective than switching between generic preparations which have bioavailabilities at the extremes of acceptable limits (thromboembolism and bleeds 7. 1% vs 9.3%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with atrial fibrillation and a prior ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack, the use of one warfarin agent within the range of acceptable bioavailability can be considered economically attractive from the healthcare perspective.

Anticoagulants↗

PubMed2004

Cost effectiveness of fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol versus fluticasone propionate plus montelukast in the treatment of persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is a chronic disease, the two main components of which are inflammation and bronchoconstriction. Fluticasone propionate (FP) and salmeterol, a strategy that treats both main components of asthma, has been recently compared with FP plus montelukast in a randomised clinical trial. The present study reports economic evaluation of these two strategies. OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative cost effectiveness when persistent asthma is treated with FP/salmeterol 100/50 microg twice daily administered via a single Diskus inhaler device versus treatment with FP 100 microg twice daily via a Diskus inhaler plus oral montelukast 10mg once daily. STUDY DESIGN: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed by applying cost unit data to resource utilisation data collected prospectively during a US randomised, double-blind, 12-week trial of FP/salmeterol (n = 222) versus FP + montelukast (n = 225). Patients were > or =15 years of age and were symptomatic despite inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Efficacy measurements in this analysis included improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) and symptom-free days. Direct costs included those related to study drugs, emergency room department visits, unscheduled physician visits, treatment of drug-related adverse events (oral candidiasis), and rescue medication (salbutamol [albuterol]). The study assumed a US third-party payer's perspective with costs in 2001 US dollars. RESULTS: Treatment with FP/salmeterol resulted in a significantly higher proportion (p < 0.001) of patients who achieved a > or =12% increase in FEV(1) than treatment with FP + montelukast (54% [95% CI 47%, 61%] vs 32% [95% CI 26%, 38%]). Lower daily costs and greater efficacy of FP/salmeterol resulted in a cost-effectiveness ratio of US6.77 dollars (95% CI US5.99 dollars, US7.66 dollars) per successfully treated patient in the FP/salmeterol group compared with US14.59 dollars (95% CI US12.12 dollars, US17.77 dollars) for FP + montelukast. In addition, FP/salmeterol achieved similar efficacy in terms of symptom-free days compared with FP + montelukast (31% [95% CI 26%, 35%] vs 27% [95% CI 23%, 32%]), but at a significantly lower daily per-patient cost (US3.64 dollars [95% CI US3.60, US3.68 dollars] vs US4.64 dollars [95% CI US4.56 dollars, US4.73 dollars]). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated the stability of the results over a range of assumptions. CONCLUSION: From a US third-party payer's perspective, these findings suggest that treating the two main components of asthma (inflammation and bronchoconstriction) with FP/salmeterol may not only be a more cost-effective strategy but may actually lead to cost savings compared with the addition of montelukast to low-dose FP in patients with persistent asthma. The results were found to be robust over a range of assumptions.

Acetates↗

PubMed2004

Cost effectiveness of ibutilide with prophylactic magnesium in the treatment of atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: In the Treatment with Ibutilide and Magnesium Evaluation (TIME) study, a retrospective multicentre cohort trial, prophylactic magnesium was found to improve the antiarrhythmic efficacy of ibutilide as demonstrated by an increase in the rate of successful chemical conversion and reduction in the need for direct current cardioversion (DCC). OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this piggyback cost-effectiveness analysis of the TIME study was to compare the cost per successful conversion of atrial fibrillation (AF) for ibutilide in the presence and absence of magnesium prophylaxis. A secondary objective was to determine whether specific factors predict costs in the conversion of AF. METHOD: The study was conducted from the US hospital-payer perspective. Direct medical costs (USD, 2002 values) including drugs, intravenous admixture and administration, DCC, electrocardiographs and physicians' fees were obtained directly from the provider. Nonparametric bootstrapping was conducted to calculate confidence intervals for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. One-way sensitivity analysis was conducted varying efficacy, and drug, hospital and physician costs. Multivariate analysis was conducted to determine whether specific baseline factors were predictors of total cost. RESULTS: Total costs per patient were lower in the ibutilide plus magnesium group compared with ibutilide alone (USD1075 vs USD1201); however, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.116). Patients receiving ibutilide plus magnesium had lower DCC costs compared with those receiving ibutilide alone (USD261 vs USD399; p = 0.036), but higher magnesium-associated costs (USD0.50 vs USD0; p < 0.001). Bootstrapping revealed that the ibutilide plus magnesium strategy would result in lower costs and greater efficacy 93.4% of the time. These results remained robust to changes in both cost and efficacy. No baseline factors were found to be independent predictors of total costs. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that adding prophylactic magnesium to ibutilide may be cost effective, from a US hospital-payer perspective, for the acute conversion of patients in AF or flutter compared with ibutilide alone.

Aged↗

PubMed2004

Cost effectiveness of ACE inhibitor treatment for patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVE: Current guidelines recommend treating patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus with ACE inhibitors after the onset of microalbuminuria. Recent clinical trials have shown ACE inhibitors can affect the development of nephropathy when initiated prior to the onset of microalbuminuria. Our objective is to examine the cost effectiveness of treating adults aged over 20 years with an ACE inhibitor (captopril) immediately following diagnosis of type 1 diabetes versus treating them after the onset of microalbuminuria. DESIGN: Using a semi-Markov model, we calculated four main outcome measures: lifetime direct medical costs (discounted), QALYs, cumulative incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), and number of days of ESRD over a lifetime. Medical costs are in 1999 US dollars. SETTING: All analyses were from the viewpoint of a single US payer responsible for all direct medical costs, including screening for microalbuminuria, ACE inhibitor treatment (captopril), management of major diabetic complications, and routine annual medical costs not specific to diabetes. METHODS: We applied the model to a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 persons newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. Distribution of sex and race/ethnicity within the cohort is representative of the general US population. RESULTS: We estimated that the incremental cost of early use of captopril for the average adult with type 1 diabetes is USD 27,143 per QALY. This level varies considerably with age and glycaemic level. When the age at onset of diabetes is 20 years and glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) level is 9%, the cost-effectiveness ratio is USD 13,814 per QALY. When the age at onset is 25 years and HbA(1c) level is 7%, the cost-effectiveness ratio is USD 39,530 per QALY. CONCLUSION: This model, with its underlying assumptions and data, suggests that early treatment with captopril provides modest benefit at reasonable cost effectiveness, from the US single-payer perspective, in the prevention of ESRD compared with delaying treatment until diagnosis of microalbuminuria. Early treatment with other ACE inhibitors will provide similar cost effectiveness if they have equivalent efficacy, compliance and price per dose. Treatment may be considered among patients at age 20 years with new onset of type 1 diabetes. This conclusion is sensitive to the extent that ACE inhibitors delay onset of microalbuminuria. Other factors such as the patient's age and glycaemic level must be considered when deciding to initiate early treatment.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Cost-minimisation analysis of sivelestat for acute lung injury associated with systemic inflammatory response syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a cost-minimisation analysis of sivelestat sodium hydrate treatment for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) with acute lung injury (ALI) associated with systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) caused by infection. DESIGN: The analysis was performed based on data from a phase III randomised, multicentre, double-blind, controlled clinical study of up to 14 days treatment with sivelestat, in which the effect of intravenous sivelestat at a high dose (0.20 mg/kg/h; the sivelestat group) was compared with that at a low dose (0.004 mg/kg/h, effectively a placebo; the control group). PATIENTS: Patients with ALI associated with SIRS caused by infection, who began their treatment under mechanical ventilation management in the ICU. METHODS: A four-stage Markov model was constructed to represent the possible conditions of an ALI patient: ICU plus intubated mechanical ventilation; ICU plus weaned from a mechanical ventilator; admission to the general ward; and death. The base-case analysis used a mechanical ventilator weaning daily rate of 2.9% for the control group and 4.0% for the sivelestat group, and the same mortality (1.2%) for both groups at all stages of the Markov model. Medical costs were estimated from standard fees and Japanese National Health Insurance drug prices included fees for hospitalisation within the ICU and general wards, mechanical ventilation, examinations and drug expenditure. Costs were in 2001 values. Sensitivity analyses were performed by varying the weaning rate, mortality, time between weaning and discharge to the general ward, and drug costs. PERSPECTIVE: Payers of healthcare costs. MAIN OUTCOMES: The expected 30-day medical costs per patient in the control and sivelestat groups were Japanese yen (yen) 4,144,887 and 3,975,451 yen, respectively; a difference of 169,436 yen. Drug expenditure accounted for more than half of the medical costs for each group. The periods under mechanical ventilation management and in the ICU for the sivelestat group were shorter than those for the control group by 2 and 1.8 days, respectively. This was of significance in the reduction of the medical costs. A sensitivity analysis suggested that the expected costs for the sivelestat group exceeded those for the control group when the daily weaning rate for the sivelestat group was <3.5%, and also when mortality rates were set at 0.9% in the sivelestat group and 1.4% in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that from the Japanese healthcare payer perspective, treatment with sivelestat may reduce medical costs compared with standard care for patients with ALI associated with SIRS caused by infection.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2006

A multi-country economic evaluation of low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: Low-dose aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) is standard care in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease (CVD). The use of low-dose aspirin in primary prevention is not yet fully established, although meta-analyses and US and European guidelines support its use in people at increased risk of CVD. The primary objective of this study was to assess the economic consequences of the use of low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of CVD in four European countries (UK, Germany, Spain and Italy). METHODS: Based on results (benefits and harms) reported in meta-analyses, a state-transition model was developed to predict the cost effectiveness of low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of CVD. The model consists of five health states: no history of CVD, history of stroke, history of myocardial infarction (MI), history of stroke and MI, and death. A 10-year time horizon and 1-year cycles were used. Secondary prevention data were derived from the aspirin arm of the CAPRIE (Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischaemic Events) study. Direct costs from the public healthcare payer's perspective were used (euro, 2003 values). Effects were expressed in life-years (LY) and QALYs gained. Quality weights were obtained from published data.Country-specific discounting was applied on effects and costs (3.5% for the UK, 5% for Germany and 3% for Spain and Italy). Univariate sensitivity analysis and Monte Carlo simulation were performed to assess uncertainty in the results. RESULTS: For patients with an annual risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) of 1.5%, the model resulted in 10-year savings with low-dose aspirin of on average euro 201 (95% CI 81, 331), euro 281 (95% CI 141, 422), euro 797 (95% CI 301, 1331) and euro 427 (95% CI 122, 731) per patient in the UK, Germany, Spain and Italy, respectively. Average total cost was almost 3- to 4-fold higher in Spain and Italy than in the UK and Germany. Savings (non-significant) start in the first year of treatment in all countries. Sensitivity analyses on cost of complications, utility, discounting, stroke rate and gastrointestinal bleeding rate showed the robustness of the results. From an annual risk of CHD of 0.236% for the UK, 0.324% for Germany, 0.244% for Spain and 0.560% for Italy, low-dose aspirin was cost saving compared with placebo. Monte Carlo analysis showed aspirin dominance in about 97% of cases for the three studied annual risks of CHD (0.6%, 1.0% and 1.5%) in the UK, Germany and Spain. In Italy, aspirin dominance in > 95% of cases was seen at annual risks of 1% and 1.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Administering low-dose aspirin to patients with an annual risk of CHD of > or = 1% appears to be significantly cost saving from the healthcare payer's perspective in all countries analysed. Sensitivity analyses (CHD risk and bleedings) suggested the results were robust.

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal↗

PubMed2006

The long-term cost effectiveness of treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia.

INTRODUCTION: Excellent treatment outcomes with long-term durability and few adverse effects are expectations of treatments for chronic conditions. The long-term cost effectiveness of newer treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), including high-energy transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) and combination pharmaceutical therapy, has not been sufficiently studied against existing alternatives. The objective of this study was to estimate the incremental cost effectiveness of BPH treatment alternatives. METHODS: We employed a Markov model over a 20-year time horizon and the payer's perspective to evaluate the cost effectiveness of watchful waiting (WW), pharmaceuticals (alpha-adrenoceptor antagonists [alpha-blockers], 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors [5-ARIs], combination therapy), TUMT and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in treating BPH. Markov states included improvement in symptoms, no improvement in symptoms, adverse effects and death. We used data from the published literature for outcomes, including systematic reviews whenever possible. Costs were estimated using a managed-care claims database and Medicare fee schedules, and were reported in Dollars US, 2004 values. Costs and effectiveness outcomes were discounted at a rate of 3% per year. Men (aged > or =45 years) with moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms and uncomplicated BPH were included in the analysis, and results were stratified by age and BPH symptom levels. Outcomes included costs, QALYs, incremental cost-utility ratios and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Sensitivity analysis was performed on important parameters, with an emphasis on probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: alpha-Blockers and TUMT were cost effective for treating moderate symptoms using the threshold of Dollars US 50,000 per QALY. For example, at 65 years of age, the cost per QALY was Dollars US 16,018 for alpha-blockers compared with WW and Dollars US 30,204 for TUMT versus alpha-blockers. TURP was the most cost-effective treatment for severe symptoms (Dollars US 5824 per QALY ) versus WW. Model results were robust to changes in costs and sensitive to the assumed probabilities, utility weights, extent of improvement and life expectancy. Nevertheless, acceptability curves consistently demonstrated the same alternatives as most likely to be cost effective. CONCLUSIONS: Our model suggests that alpha-blockers and TURP appear to be the most cost-effective alternatives, from a US payer perspective, for BPH patients with moderate and severe symptoms, respectively. TUMT was promising for patients with moderate symptoms and the oldest patients with severe symptoms, but otherwise was dominated. Value of information analysis could be used to determine the net benefit of additional research.

Adrenergic alpha-Antagonists↗

PubMed2006

Aromatase inhibitors in breast cancer: a review of cost considerations and cost effectiveness.

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have been evaluated clinically in a wide range of breast cancer treatment settings. Although these agents appear to have clinical superiority, they are more expensive than the therapies (primarily tamoxifen) they have been compared with, thus economic evaluation is required to consider their incremental value to the payer. This paper reviews published economic evaluations of AIs as first-line therapy for advanced cancer, and as adjuvant therapy for early breast cancer. The evaluations in the advanced setting demonstrate a range of different modelling techniques and consider the payer's perspective in three healthcare systems. There is broad similarity in the application of standard cohort Markov modelling techniques to evaluate AIs in the early breast cancer setting, covering four separate health system perspectives. AIs appear cost effective compared with current practice. An analysis in the advanced setting suggests that letrozole may be the more cost-effective AI. No direct comparisons of alternative AIs in the adjuvant setting are reported, although indirect comparisons may be feasible. Future evaluations of treatment strategies over the entire course of the disease may also be needed.

Aromatase Inhibitors↗