Cost-effectiveness analysis of low density lipoprotein cholesterol-lowering therapy in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes in Korea: single-pill regimen (amlodipine/atorvastatin) versus double-pill regimen (amlodipine+atorvastatin) / 한국역학회지

OBJECTIVES: Single-pill combination therapy (amlodipine/atorvastatin) might be more effective than double-pill therapy (amlodipine+atorvastatin) in patients with diabetes and concomitant hypertension requiring statin therapy. We compared the cost-effectiveness of a single-pill with that of double-pill for control of low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, with the ultimate goal of cardiovascular disease prevention, in these patients using a cost-effectiveness analysis model that considered medication adherence. METHODS: Effectiveness was defined as the percentage (%) attainment of target LDL-C levels ( or =80% proportion of days covered). A systematic review of the literature was conducted to determine the proportion of patients who were adherent and target goal attainment based on adherence level. The annual medication costs were based on the adherence levels for each regimen. The average cost-effectiveness ratio (ACER) was calculated as the cost per % attainment of the target LDL-C level. RESULTS: The ACER for the single-pill regimen was lower than for the double-pill regimen (4,123 vs. 6,062 Korean won per 1% achievement of target goal). Compared with the double-pill, the medication costs were approximately 32% lower with the single-pill. CONCLUSION: A single-pill for reductions in LDL-C is cost-effective compared with double-pill in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes.

Amlodipine and cardiovascular outcomes in hypertensive patients: meta-analysis comparing amlodipine-based versus other antihypertensive therapy

BACKGROUND/AIMS: This meta-analysis compared the effects of amlodipine besylate, a charged dihydropyridine-type calcium channel blocker (CCB), with other non-CCB antihypertensive therapies regarding the cardiovascular outcome. METHODS: Data from seven long-term outcome trials comparing the cardiovascular outcomes of an amlodipine-based regimen with other active regimens were pooled and analyzed. RESULTS: The risk of myocardial infarction was significantly decreased with an amlodipine-based regimen compared with a non-CCB-based regimen (odds ratio [OR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 0.99; p = 0.03). The risk of stroke was also significantly decreased (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.90; p < 0.00001). The risk of heart failure increased slightly with marginal significance for an amlodipine-based regimen compared with a non-CCB-based regimen (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.31; p = 0.08). However, when compared overall with beta-blockers and diuretics, amlodipine showed a comparable risk. Amlodipine-based regimens demonstrated a 10% risk reduction in overall cardiovascular events (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.99; p = 0.02) and total mortality (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91 to 0.99; p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Amlodipine reduced the risk of total cardiovascular events as well as all-cause mortality compared with non-CCB-based regimens, indicating its benefit for high-risk cardiac patients.

The Financial Burden of Asthma: A Nationwide Comprehensive Survey Conducted in the Republic of Korea

PURPOSE: Asthma-related morbidity and mortality are increasing, and the financial burden imposed by this condition will substantially increase. Nevertheless, little information is available regarding the nature and magnitude of the burden due to asthma at the national level. This study was conducted to characterize the financial burden imposed by asthma in the Republic of Korea at the national level. METHODS: The overall prevalence of asthma and the costs of related medical services were determined using data from the National Health Insurance Corporation, which is responsible for the National Health Insurance scheme. Indirect costs, including expenditures on complementary and alternative medicines, and the economic impact of an impaired quality of life (intangible costs) were estimated by surveying 660 asthmatics, and these estimates were transformed to the national level using the prevalence of asthma. RESULTS: The prevalence of asthma and total costs related to the disease in 2004 were 4.19% and $2.04 billion, respectively. Direct costs and indirect costs contributed equally to total costs (46.9% and 53.1%, respectively). However, when intangible costs were included, total costs rose to $4.11 billion, which was equivalent to 0.44% of the national gross domestic product in 2004. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide evidence that asthma is a major health cost factor in the Republic of Korea and that intangible costs associated with asthma are significant cost drivers.

An Evaluation of Effects on Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus Management of a Community-Based Nursing Care Center Using Cost-Benefit Analysis / 간호행정학회지

PURPOSE: This study was conducted to evaluate the economic efficiency of a community-based nursing care center to help policy makers determine whether or not to invest in similar facilities. METHODS: The subjects were 101 elderly people over 65 years who participated in a health management program from February 1 to July 31, 2007. Direct cost was estimated with center operations cost, medical cost for out-patients and pharmacy cost. Indirect cost was measured by transportation cost. Direct benefit was calculated by saved medical cost for out-patients, saved pharmacy cost, saved transportation cost, and reducing hospital charges. Indirect benefit was estimated with prevention of severe complications. Economic efficiency was evaluated by cost-benefit ratio and net benefit. RESULTS: Operating a community-based nursing care center was found to be cost-effective. Specifically, the cost of operating the center evaluated here was estimated at 135 million won while the benefit was estimated at 187 million won. Benefit-cost ratio was 1.38. CONCLUSION: The Community-based nursing care center that was described here could be a useful health care delivery system for reducing medical expenditures.

Economic Evaluation of Gemcitabine-cisplatin Chemotherapy for Non Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patient in an Outpatient Setting / 간호학회지

PURPOSE: This analysis was conducted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of gemcitabine-cisplatin chemotherapy for non small-cell lung cancer patients in an outpatient setting compared with the traditional inpatient setting. METHODS: A cost-effective analysis was conducted from a societal perspective. The effects of treatment, which was measured as an adverse event rate, were abstracted from a published literature search and empirical data from one university hospital. The costs included both direct and indirect costs. Direct costs included hospitalizations, outpatient visits, and lab tests. Pharmaceutical costs were excluded in analysis because they were same for both options. Indirect costs included productivity loss of patients as well as care-givers. In order to determine the robustness of the results, sensitivity analysis on treatment protocol was conducted. RESULTS: Literature search showed no difference in adverse effect rates between inpatient treatment protocol and outpatient treatment protocol. Therefore, this analysis is a cost-minimization analysis. Cost-savings in the outpatient setting was 555,936 won for one treatment cycle. Our sensitivity analysis indicated that the outpatient chemotherapy still showed cost-savings, regardless of changes in treatment protocol. CONCLUSION: The outpatient gemcitabine-cisplatin chemotherapy for non small-cell lung cancer resulted in cost savings compared to inpatient chemotherapy. More importantly, outpatient chemotherapy could improve the utilization of health service resources in terms of available beds.