Abstract
BackgroundThe aim of this cross-sectional survey was to compare the health-economic consequences for allergic rhinitis (AR) patients treated with sublingual Immunotherapy (SLIT) in terms of direct and indirect costs with a reference population of patients receiving standard of care pharmacological therapy.MethodsPrimary objective was to analyse the health-economic consequences of SLIT for grass pollen allergy in Sweden vs reference group waiting for subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT). A questionnaire was mailed to two groups of AR patients.ResultsThe questionnaire was distributed to 548 patients, 307 with SLIT and 241 in reference group (waiting for SCIT). Response rate was 53.8%. Mean annual costs were higher for reference patients than SLIT group; € 3907 (SD 4268) vs € 2084 (SD 1623) p < 0.001. Mean annual direct cost was higher for SLIT-patients, € 1191 (SD 465) than for reference, € 751 (SD 589) p < 0.001. Mean annual indirect costs for combined absenteeism and presenteeism were lower for patients treated with SLIT, € 912 (SD 1530), than for reference, € 3346 (SD 4120) p < 0.001, with presenteeism as main driver.ConclusionsSLIT seems to be a cost-beneficial way to treat seasonal AR. This information might be used to guide future recommendations.
Highlights
The aim of this cross-sectional survey was to compare the health-economic consequences for allergic rhinitis (AR) patients treated with sublingual Immunotherapy (SLIT) in terms of direct and indirect costs with a reference population of patients receiving standard of care pharmacological therapy
Sample characteristics The questionnaire was distributed to 548 patients, 307 treated with sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) and 241 in the reference group, waiting for Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT)
Costs The mean annual pharmaceutical costs were higher among SLIT patients than among the population controls, € 1014 (Standard Deviation, Standard deviation (SD) 325) vs € 183 (SD 123, p < 0.001)
Summary
The aim of this cross-sectional survey was to compare the health-economic consequences for allergic rhinitis (AR) patients treated with sublingual Immunotherapy (SLIT) in terms of direct and indirect costs with a reference population of patients receiving standard of care pharmacological therapy. Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) has been used for decades, whereas sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has been available for about 10 years Both therapies have been proven efficacious in the treatment of pollen induced symptoms, but their use is limited by drawbacks. The aim of the present cross-sectional survey, “HealthSWEDE” or Health economy and sublingual immunotherapy in Sweden, was to compare the healtheconomic consequences for patients treated with SLIT, in terms of direct and indirect costs with patients receiving standard of care pharmacological therapy. The aim of the present cross-sectional survey, “HealthSWEDE” or Health economy and sublingual immunotherapy in Sweden, was to compare the healtheconomic consequences for patients treated with SLIT, in terms of direct and indirect costs with patients receiving standard of care pharmacological therapy. (Additional file 2)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
