التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
| العنوان: |
A COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS OF rhDNase IN CHILDREN WITH CYSTIC FIBROSIS. |
| المؤلفون: |
Richard Grieve, Simon Thompson, Charles Normand, Ranjan Suri, Andrew Bush, Colin Wallis |
| المصدر: |
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care; Jan2003, Vol. 19 Issue 1, p71-79, 9p |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: |
DEOXYRIBONUCLEASES, NUCLEASES, CYSTIC fibrosis treatment, GENETIC disorders, HEALTH |
| مستخلص: |
Objectives: This study compared the relative cost-effectiveness of daily recombinant human deoxyribonuclease (rhDNase), with alternate day rhDNase and hypertonic saline (HS) for treating children with cystic fibrosis (CF). Methods: A randomized controlled trial with a crossover design allocated 40 CF children consecutively to 12 weeks of daily rhDNase, alternate day rhDNase, or HS. The primary outcome measure was forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), a measure of lung function. All health resource use was prospectively documented for each patient and multiplied by unit costs to give a total health service cost for each 12-week treatment period. The nonparametric bootstrap method was used to present cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and net benefit statistics for each treatment comparison, for various hypothetical levels of the decision maker's ceiling ratio. Results: Compared with HS, there was a 14% improvement in FEV1 for daily rhDNase (95% CI, 5% to 23%), and a 12% improvement (95% CI, 2% to 22%) for alternate day rhDNase. For a ceiling ratio of £200 per 1% gain in FEV1, the mean net benefits of daily and alternate day rhDNase compared with HS were £1,158 (95% CI, -£621 to 2,842) and £1,188 (95% CI, -847 to 3,343), respectively; the mean net benefit of daily compared with alternate day rhDNase was *minus;£30 (95% CI, -£2,091 to 1,576). Conclusions: If decision makers are prepared to pay £200 for a 1% gain in FEV1 over a 12-week period, then on average either rhDNase strategy is cost-effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| قاعدة البيانات: |
Complementary Index |
Full Text Finder