Comparison Of Treatment Costs Research Articles

PCV35 Cross-Country Comparison of Treatment Costs with Amiodarone and Propafenone in Arrhythmia

PCV35 Cross-Country Comparison of Treatment Costs with Amiodarone and Propafenone in Arrhythmia

Comparison of treatment costs and outcome in public orthodontic services in Finland

The objectives of the study were to compare the costs and outcome of orthodontic treatment in eight municipal health centres in Finland. A random sample of the age groups of 16- and 18-year-olds (n = 1109) living in these municipalities was clinically examined by two calibrated orthodontists. The acceptability of the morphology and function of the occlusion were assessed with the Occlusal Morphology and Function Index (OMFI). The data concerning previous orthodontic treatment were collected from the patient records of all subjects (n = 608) who reported previous or ongoing orthodontic treatment or who could not recall if they had received orthodontic treatment. The health centres were grouped into an early and a late timing group according to the mean age of starting the treatment. The mean age for starting orthodontic treatment was 8.0 years (SD 1.9) in the early group and 10.7 years (SD 2.3) in the late group. The visit costs and the costs of orthodontic appliances without overheads comprised the operating costs. The cost-effectiveness of orthodontic services was measured by estimating how much each health centre had to have paid for one per cent unit of acceptable morphology and acceptable function of occlusion. The mean appliance costs were higher in the late timing group and the mean visit costs higher in the early timing group. The mean operating costs per case were €720 in the early and €649 in the late timing group. However, there was a great variation within both groups. The cost of one per cent unit of acceptable morphology was the same in the two timing groups, while the cost of one per cent unit of acceptable function was lower in the early timing group. The low operating costs as such did not totally explain the better cost-effectiveness of orthodontic care. Furthermore, the cost-effectiveness was not directly connected with the timing of treatment.

Comparison of treatment costs of grade 3/4 adverse events associated with erlotinib or pemetrexed maintenance therapy for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in Germany, France, Italy, and Spain

Objective of this indirect economic comparison was to estimate and compare management costs of grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) reported for first-line erlotinib or pemetrexed maintenance therapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The economic analysis was performed for Germany, France, Italy and Spain.Types and incidences of reported grade 3/4 AEs observed with erlotinib or pemetrexed maintenance therapy were retrieved from two recently published placebo-controlled trials. Country-specific estimates on standard treatment algorithms and incremental medical resource utilization associated with each of the reported grade 3/4 AEs have been obtained from clinical oncologists practicing in the four countries and co-authoring this article. The resource use items were subsequently assigned country-specific tariffs to estimate total per-patients costs associated with the AE profiles of the two compared maintenance regimens. For the economic analysis a customized economic spreadsheet model was employed.Our comparison shows lower total average per-patient AE management costs for erlotinib than for pemetrexed maintenance therapy in all four studied countries. Total estimated cost savings per patient in favour of erlotinib amount to € 121, € 237, € 106, and € 119 for Germany, France, Italy and Spain, respectively. These AE cost savings for erlotinib when compared to pemetrexed represent a decrease by 80%, 71%, 94%, and 82%, respectively. The study also discovered considerable differences in AE management costs across countries which are primarily due to differences in clinician's estimates of hospitalization referral rates.Erlotinib maintenance therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC causes lower AE management costs than pemetrexed maintenance therapy indicating a potentially superior tolerability profile.

Radiofrequency Ablation vs Conventional Surgery for Varicose Veins – a Comparison of Treatment Costs in a Randomised Trial

Radiofrequency Ablation vs Conventional Surgery for Varicose Veins – a Comparison of Treatment Costs in a Randomised Trial

Radiofrequency Ablation vs Conventional Surgery for Varicose Veins – a Comparison of Treatment Costs in a Randomised Trial

To compare the costs involved (from procedure to recovery) following radiofrequency ablation and conventional surgery for lower limb varicose veins in a selected population. Prospective randomised controlled trial. Patients with symptomatic great saphenous varicose veins suitable for radiofrequency ablation were randomised to either RF ablation or surgery (sapheno-femoral ligation and stripping). The hospital, general practice and patient costs incurred until full recovery and the indirect cost to society, due to sickness leave after surgery, were calculated to indicate mean cost per patient under each category. Ninety three patients were randomised. Eighty eight patients (47 - RF ablation, 41 - surgery) underwent the allocated intervention. Ablation took longer to perform than surgery (mean 76.8 vs 47.0 min, p<.001). Ablation was more expensive (mean hospital cost per patient 1275.90 pounds vs 559.13 pounds) but enabled patients to return to work 1 week earlier than after surgery (mean 12.2 vs 19.8 days, p=0.006). Based on the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (Office of National Statistics, UK) for full time employees, the cost per working hour gained after ablation was 6.94 pounds (95% CI 6.26, 7.62). The increased cost of radiofrequency ablation is partly offset by a quicker return to work in the employed group (ISRCTN29015169http://www.controlled-trials.com).

Comparison of treatment costs in inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes in Germany based on the APOLLO trial with insulin glargine

Objective: A cost analysis of once-daily insulin glargine versus three-times daily insulin lispro in combination with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) for insulin-naive type 2 diabetes patients in Germany based on the APOLLO trial (A Parallel design comparing an Oral antidiabetic drug combination therapy with either Lantus once daily or Lispro at mealtime in type 2 diabetes patients failing Oral treatment).Methods: Annual direct treatment costs were estimated from the perspective of the German statutory health insurance (SHI). Costs accounted for included insulin medication, disposable pens and consumable items (needles, blood glucose test strips and lancets). Sensitivity analyses (on resource use and unit costs) were performed to reflect current German practice.Results: Average treatment costs per patient per year in the base case were €1,073 for glargine and €1,794 for lispro. Insulin costs represented 65% vs. 37% of total costs respectively. Acquisition costs of glargine were offset by the lower costs of consumable items (€380 vs. €1,139). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results in favour of glargine. All scenarios yielded cost savings in total treatment costs ranging from €84 to €727.Conclusions: Combination therapy of once-daily insulin glargine versus three-times daily insulin lispro both with OADs, in the management of insulin-dependent type 2 diabetes offers the potential for substantial cost savings from the German SHI perspective.

Rehabilitationsmanagement

The Institution for Statutory Insurance in the Chemical Industry (BG Chemie) has carried out a case control study to measure the effects of strategic intervention by the handling clerk, together with the consulting physician in the administration, during a treatment performed by the professional association on the basis of defined problem diagnoses. To this end, a retrospective case group not subjected to any intervention strategy was compared with a prospective case group in which the approved intervention strategy was applied. The project is described, and the project results are referred to specific groups of injuries by comparison of treatment costs, duration of incapacity, and degree of incapacity persisting when patients were fit for work again.