Enteroviral meningitis. Cost of illness and considerations for the economic evaluation of potential therapies.

With limited financial resources available, it is now becoming more acceptable to evaluate medical innovations in terms of incremental economic value. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of enteroviral meningitis and to summarise the economic literature to identify relevant costs and outcomes. Enteroviral meningitis is the most common cause of aseptic meningitis, and occurs in 4.5 to 30 per 100,000 population annually with a duration of illness lasting between 1 and 2 weeks after onset of initial symptoms. The major resource categories that contribute to the overall direct costs of management of enteroviral meningitis include physician visits, hospital admissions, emergency room visits, medications, procedures such as lumbar puncture and computed tomography scans, re-hospitalizations and follow-up physician visits. Indirect costs are incurred in terms of school or work days missed or restrictions in daily activities. The total direct costs of an episode of enteroviral meningitis range from $US450 for outpatients to $US5093 for inpatient management (1996 values). The total indirect costs of an episode of enteroviral meningitis are estimated to be equivalent to 5 to 7 activity-restricted days. Interventions that improve early diagnosis or decrease the duration and need for hospitalisation will significantly affect the cost of managing enteroviral meningitis. Additional prospective studies are needed to study the impact of interventions on the burden of enteroviral meningitis.

Identification of resource use and associated costs for viral meningitis.

PURPOSE: This study involved identifying resource use and assigning monetary value to the diagnostic work-up and management of viral meningitis. METHODOLOGY: Using a previously established decision analytic framework, various resources were identified as part of routine management of viral meningitis. Secondary database analyses were used to quantify resources and assign a monetary value as a part of routine management of viral meningitis requiring use of the resource units identified in the decision analytic framework. Discharge data sources from the states of California, Florida, and Illinois, and Medicaid data sources from the state of Pennsylvania, were used for the purpose of analysis. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Physician visits, emergency room visits, hospital admissions, procedures, and medications were identified as the major resource used. Lumbar punctures, CT scans, and antibiotics were identified as the major procedures and medications utilized. No significant difference was found in the major resources used between the states' discharge data and the Medicaid data sources. The mean total charges for patient admissions with CT scans were significantly higher than for patient admissions without CT scans ($11,531.80 vs $7,841.30, P < 0.05). The mean lengths of stay for patients with CT scan were significantly higher than for patient admissions without CT scans (4.71 days vs. 3.88 days, P < 0.05). The patient readmission rate was 10.7 percent, while the readmission rate for episodes with more than one hospitalization was 11.1 percent. The mean charge associated with readmission was $12,200.

Opioid-induced emesis among hospitalized nonsurgical patients: effect on pain and quality of life.

There is very little information in the medical literature regarding opioid-induced emesis and its relationship to patient outcomes. Two-hundred and six nonsurgical patients in a 400-bed teaching hospital with minimal known risks of disease-associated emesis were interviewed to examine emesis and associated outcomes following the administration of opioids for acute pain management. The mean age, weight, and height of the study group were 54.4 (+/- 19.6) years, 175.8 (+/- 45.7) pounds, and 67.1 (+/- 4.4) inches, respectively. Seventy-three (35.4%) patients experienced nausea; 28 (13.6%) patients vomited; and 15 (7.3%) patients retched following the opioid therapy. These symptoms were mild and discomforting for relatively short periods of time. The patients' ability to concentrate and eat was affected by the incidence of nausea/vomiting. The intensity, duration, and severity of nausea were positively associated with the magnitude of the functional limitations. The symptoms also influenced patients' ratings of various hospital satisfaction measures. In conclusion, emesis due to opioids represents a notable burden on nonsurgical patients. Successful therapies that prevent opioid-induced emesis are likely to positively influence patient outcomes by reducing adverse effects, improving functional outcomes, and enhancing quality of life.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of oral ondansetron and prochlorperazine for preventing nausea and vomiting after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

The article reports a study comparing the cost-effectiveness of ondansetron tablets and prochlorperazine capsules in preventing nausea and vomiting after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy in an outpatient setting. A decision analysis model was constructed to compare the cost-effectiveness of the two antiemetics from the perspective of third party health care payers. Probability estimates of the model were derived from a reanalysis of data obtained from a clinical trial directly comparing the two antiemetics. Effectiveness was defined as the number of patients with no emetic episodes and no drug-related adverse events during the 3-day period after receiving chemotherapy. Cost-estimates were based on Average Wholesale Price for medications and national average for hospital services adjusted to 1996 U.S. dollars. Cost-effectiveness ratios for ondansetron and prochlorperazine were $261 and $268 per effectively treated patient, respectively. A series of sensitivity analyses were performed to identify the limits of generalizability of study results. Despite the initial price differential between the two antiemetics, ondansetron was more cost effective than prochlorperazine when the duration of therapy was shorter than 3 days, the total cost of rescue therapy per patient was more than $71, the treatment cost of adverse events was less than $24, the complete relief rate for ondansetron was greater than 58.9 percent, and the complete relief rate for prochlorperazine was less than 26.5 percent.

Costs of epilepsy in an intermediate care facility for persons with mental retardation.

Epilepsy is a significant comorbid condition in institutionalized persons with developmental disabilities and may contribute significant additional costs. This study was conducted to provide an estimate of the costs of epilepsy from the institutional perspective. Costs were measured retrospectively for 50 persons with epilepsy and 50 persons without epilepsy matched by severity of developmental disability. A time and motion study was employed to assign opportunity costs to documented nursing and physician activities. Two separate methods of attribution were used and incremental costs attributable to epilepsy were found to be approximately $825 and $918 per person over a 6-month period. The following categories accounted for costs: personnel (47.0%), drug (39.6%), hospitalization (9.4%), and laboratories/procedures (4.0%). Results are useful for describing the economic burden of epilepsy.

A comparison of the efficacy, safety, and patient satisfaction of ondansetron versus droperidol as antiemetics for elective outpatient surgical procedures. S3A-409 and S3A-410 Study Groups.

UNLABELLED: Two identical, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies enrolled 2061 adult surgical outpatients at high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) to compare i.v. ondansetron 4 mg with droperidol 0.625 mg and droperidol 1.25 mg for the prevention of PONV. The antiemetic drugs or placebo were administered i.v. 20 min before the induction of anesthesia with a barbiturate compound, followed by maintenance with N2O/isoflurane/enflurane. Nausea, emetic episodes, adverse events, and patient satisfaction were analyzed for the 0 to 2 h and 0 to 24 h postoperative periods. In the 0 to 2 h postoperative period, there was a complete response (no emesis or rescue antiemetic) in 46% of subjects given placebo (P < 0.05 versus antiemetic groups), in 62% given ondansetron, in 63% given droperidol 0.625 mg, and in 69% given droperidol 1.25 mg (P < 0.05 versus ondansetron). In the 0 to 24-h postoperative period, there were no significant differences in complete response between the ondansetron and droperidol 0.625 or 1.25 mg groups; all groups remained superior to placebo. The proportion of patients without nausea during the 0 to 24 h postoperative period was greater in the antiemetic groups compared with the placebo group; however, droperidol 1.25 mg was more effective than ondansetron 4 mg or droperidol 0.625 mg (43% vs 29% or 29%, respectively). Headache incidence was higher in the ondansetron group compared with either droperidol group. Patient satisfaction scores did not differ significantly among antiemetic treatment groups, although all were superior to placebo. In conclusion, all antiemetic treatment regimens were superior to placebo for the prevention of PONV in the immediate postoperative period; however, droperidol 1.25 mg was more efficacious than ondansetron during the early recovery period (0-2 h). There were no significant differences between ondansetron and either droperidol dose for emesis prevention during the 0 to 24 h postoperative period. IMPLICATIONS: More than 2000 patients at high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting were given either placebo, ondansetron 4 mg, or droperidol 0.625 mg or 1.25 mg i.v. before the administration of general anesthesia. After surgery, the incidence of nausea, vomiting, medication side effects, and patient satisfaction were evaluated for 24 h. Droperidol 0.625 or 1.25 mg i.v. compared favorably with ondansetron 4 mg i.v. for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after ambulatory surgery.

Beyond survival: economic analyses of chemotherapy in advanced, inoperable NSCLC.

Research shows that chemotherapy for inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) improves survival. The economic implications of this treatment choice may be substantial. This paper reviews studies examining the cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy in this setting. MEDLINE, PDQ, Cancerlit, EMBASE, and the Nursing & Allied Health databases were searched using the terms cost, cost-effectiveness, chemotherapy, and non-small-cell lung cancer. The search identified 17 studies. Most of these studies utilized data from various sources to model the impact and cost of chemotherapy. The remaining studies were concurrent or retrospective analyses of individual clinical trials. Findings suggest that chemotherapy for stages IIIb and IV non-small-cell lung cancer can be cost-effective and, in some cases, may actually be less expensive than supportive care alone. Economic analyses also indicate that allocating resources for chemotherapy in this setting can be justified relative to many treatment expenditures for other types of cancer and other disease. Application of these findings may be hindered by the wide variety of techniques used and by several methodologic issues, including the failure to address patients' treatment preferences. Yet, economic analyses of inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer can provide important information to complement survival and quality-of-life data in resource allocation decisions.

Single-dose ondansetron prevents postoperative vomiting in pediatric outpatients.

UNLABELLED: This randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study evaluated the safety and efficacy of ondansetron (0.1 mg/kg to 4 mg intravenously) compared with placebo in the prevention of postoperative vomiting in 429 ASA status I-III children 1-12 yr old undergoing outpatient surgery under nitrous oxide- and halothane-based general anesthesia. The results show that during both the 2-h and the 24-h evaluation periods after discontinuation of nitrous oxide, a significantly greater percentage of ondansetron-treated patients (2 h 89%, 24 h 68%) compared with placebo-treated patients (2 h 71%, 24 h 40%) experienced complete response (i.e., no emetic episodes, not rescued, and not withdrawn; P < 0.001 at both time points). Ondansetron-treated patients reached criteria for home readiness one-half hour sooner than placebo-treated patients (P < 0.05). The age of the child, use of intraoperative opioids, type of surgery, and requirement to tolerate fluids before discharge may also have affected the incidence of postoperative emesis during the 0- to 24-h observation period. Use of postoperative opioids did not have any effect on complete response rates in this patient population. We conclude that the prophylactic use of ondansetron reduces postoperative emesis in pediatric patients, regardless of the operant influential factors. IMPLICATIONS: Postoperative nausea and vomiting often occur after surgery and general anesthesia in children and are the major reason for unexpected hospital admission after ambulatory surgery. Our study demonstrates that the prophylactic use of a small dose of ondansetron reduces postoperative vomiting in pediatric patients.

Economic impact with home delivery of chemotherapy to pediatric oncology patients.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the economic impact of a home chemotherapy program (HCP) for pediatric oncology patients. RATIONALE: Factors that led to initiation of an HCP included availability of specially trained nurses and programmable ambulatory infusion devices at local home care agencies, routine central venous catheter placement, inpatient bed space shortages, and the availability of ondansetron. SETTING: Chemotherapy delivery in the home setting from June 1991 through June 1994. DESIGN: Charge data and nausea and vomiting severity data were collected for patients treated through the HCP. METHODS: Economic impact was calculated by incorporating and summing all charge categories associated with hospital admission for chemotherapy (HAC) versus delivery by the HCP. All data were adjusted for 1993 dollars, and reflect changes for the average patient size (1 m2). Charge data for each chemotherapy protocol delivered in the home were analyzed by calculating the differences between HAC and HCP charges using the following formula: charge difference (HAC - HCP) per protocol times the number of courses. Total economic impact was calculated by summing the differences in charges for each protocol. RESULTS: A total of 262 chemotherapy courses were given to 44 patients (mean age 9.5 +/- 5.1 y) through the HCP, which represented 1012 patient care days and 24 different chemotherapy protocols. Monetary savings from the HCP ranged from $5180 per course of ifosfamide plus etoposide to $367 per course for high-dose methotrexate. Total monetary savings from the HCP during the 3-year period was $640,793. Successful control of nausea and vomiting with a combination of ondansetron plus methylprednisolone was achieved in approximately 80% of the patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy protocols. CONCLUSIONS: HCP for pediatric oncology patients results in substantial monetary savings to payors. Effective control of nausea and vomiting can be accomplished at home in the majority of patients with an ondansetron-based antiemetic regimen.

Efficacy and tolerability of oral ondansetron versus prochlorperazine in the prevention of emesis associated with cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy and maintenance of health-related quality of life.

This study compared the efficacy and tolerability of oral ondansetron (8 mg twice daily [BID] for up to 3 days) with those of phenothiazine prochlorperazine (10 mg BID for up to 3 days) in 133 cancer patients receiving cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy. In addition, the study evaluated the impact of these treatments on patients' health-related quality of life, measured with both the Functional Living Index-Cancer and the Functional Living Index-Emesis questionnaires. The first dose of study drug was administered 30 minutes before initiation of chemotherapy. Patients received a rescue antiemetic at their request or if the investigator deemed it necessary. There was a statistically significant difference in the number of patients with no emetic episodes over the 3-day study period: 60% in the ondansetron group compared with 21% in the prochlorperazine group. Twenty-five percent of ondansetron-treated patients compared with 68% of prochlorperazine-treated patients experienced three or more emetic episodes, rescue medication use, or withdrawal from the study due to emesis or adverse events. Among patients with at least one emetic episode, the mean time to emesis was significantly longer (13 hours and 37 minutes) in the ondansetron group compared with the prochlorperazine group (9 hours and 30 minutes). Nausea and appetite scores did not differ significantly between groups. The score on the vomiting subscale of the Functional Living Index-Emesis was significantly more favorable in the ondansetron group compared with the prochlorperazine group, indicating better maintenance of health-related quality of life in ondansetron-treated patients. Both treatments were well tolerated. The most common potentially drug-related adverse event was headache, which occurred in significantly more (16%) ondansetron-treated patients compared with prochlorperazine-treated patients (3%). The results of this study demonstrate that oral ondansetron 8 mg BID for up to 3 days is more effective than prochlorperazine 10 mg BID for up to 3 days in the prevention of emesis associated with moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

Efficacy and tolerability of oral ondansetron versus prochlorperazine in the prevention of emesis associated with cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy and maintenance of health-related quality of life.

This study compared the efficacy and tolerability of oral ondansetron (8 mg twice daily [BID] for up to 3 days) with those of phenothiazine prochlorperazine (10 mg BID for up to 3 days) in 133 cancer patients receiving cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy. In addition, the study evaluated the impact of these treatments on patients' health-related quality of life, measured with both the Functional Living Index--Cancer and the Functional Living Index--Emesis questionnaires. The first dose of study drug was administered 30 minutes before initiation of chemotherapy. Patients received a rescue antiemetic at their request or if the investigator deemed it necessary. There was a statistically significant difference in the number of patients with no emetic episodes over the 3-day study period: 60% in the ondansetron group compared with 21% in the prochlorperazine group. Twenty-five percent of ondansetron-treated patients compared with 68% of prochlorperazine-treated patients experienced three or more emetic episodes, rescue medication use, or withdrawal from the study due to adverse events or lack of efficacy of the study drug. Among patients with at least one emetic episode, the mean time to emesis was significantly longer (13 hours and 37 minutes) in the ondansetron group compared with the prochlorperazine group (9 hours and 30 minutes). Nausea and appetite scores did not differ significantly between groups. The score on the vomiting subscale of the Functional Living Index--Emesis was significantly more favorable in the ondansetron group compared with the prochlorperazine group, indicating better maintenance of health-related quality of life in ondansetron-treated patients. Both treatments were well tolerated. The most common potentially drug-related adverse event was headache, which occurred in significantly more (16%) ondansetron-treated patients compared with prochlorperazine-treated patients (3%). The results of this study demonstrate that oral ondansetron 8 mg BID for up to 3 days is more effective than prochlorperazine 10 mg BID for up to 3 days in the prevention of emesis associated with moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.