|
|
||||||||
Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password |
|||||||||
* From the Division of General Internal Medicine (Drs. Aujesky, Smith, and Roberts), Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; and the University Outpatient Clinic (Dr. Cornuz), University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Correspondence to: Drahomir Aujesky, MD, MSc, Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, University Drive C, Building 28, Suite 1A129, Pittsburgh, PA 15240; e-mail: aujesky{at}swissonline.ch
Background: Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) appears to be safe and effective for treating pulmonary embolism (PE), but its cost-effectiveness has not been assessed.
Methods: We built a Markov state-transition model to evaluate the medical and economic outcomes of a 6-day course with fixed-dose LMWH or adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin (UFH) in a hypothetical cohort of 60-year-old patients with acute submassive PE. Probabilities for clinical outcomes were obtained from a metaanalysis of clinical trials. Cost estimates were derived from Medicare reimbursement data and other sources. The base-case analysis used an inpatient setting, whereas secondary analyses examined early discharge and outpatient treatment with LMWH. Using a societal perspective, strategies were compared based on lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.
Results: Inpatient treatment costs were higher for LMWH treatment than for UFH ($13,001 vs $12,780), but LMWH yielded a greater number of QALYs than did UFH (7.677 QALYs vs 7.493 QALYs). The incremental costs of $221 and the corresponding incremental effectiveness of 0.184 QALYs resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1,209/QALY. Our results were highly robust in sensitivity analyses. LMWH became cost-saving if the daily pharmacy costs for LMWH were <$51, if
8% of patients were eligible for early discharge, or if
5% of patients could be treated entirely as outpatients.
Conclusion: For inpatient treatment of PE, the use of LMWH is cost-effective compared to UFH. Early discharge or outpatient treatment in suitable patients with PE would lead to substantial cost savings.
Key Words: cost-effectiveness low-molecular-weight heparin pulmonary embolism
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
D. Jimenez, R. D. Yusen, R. Otero, F. Uresandi, D. Nauffal, E. Laserna, F. Conget, M. Oribe, M. A. Cabezudo, and G. Diaz Prognostic Models for Selecting Patients With Acute Pulmonary Embolism for Initial Outpatient Therapy Chest, July 1, 2007; 132(1): 24 - 30. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Aujesky, P.-M. Roy, C. P. Le Manach, F. Verschuren, G. Meyer, D. S. Obrosky, R. A. Stone, J. Cornuz, and M. J. Fine Validation of a model to predict adverse outcomes in patients with pulmonary embolism Eur. Heart J., February 2, 2006; 27(4): 476 - 481. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Aujesky, D. S. Obrosky, R. A. Stone, T. E. Auble, A. Perrier, J. Cornuz, P.-M. Roy, and M. J. Fine A Prediction Rule to Identify Low-Risk Patients With Pulmonary Embolism Arch Intern Med, January 23, 2006; 166(2): 169 - 175. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |