Cost of influenza and influenza-like syndromes (I-LSs) in Italy: Results of a cross-sectional telephone survey on a representative sample of general population.

OBJECTIVES: Influenza and Influenza-like syndromes (I-LSs) are very common events in general practice, and their relevance is frequently underestimated. Aim of the study was to assess the economic impact of influenza and Influenza-like syndromes (I-LSs) in the Italian general population by using real-world data from a retrospective database. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey via Computer Assisted Telephone Interview (CATI) was carried out by using a specific questionnaire which is able to assess the rate of infectious episodes, together with subject's behavior in case of influenza or I-LSs, and prescribed therapy. Collected data were statistically analyzed to calculate the economic impact of influenza and I-LSs episodes according to both the National Health System Perspective (NHS-P) and the Italian Families Perspective (S-P). The components of cost were: influenza vaccination, used drugs, General Practitioner (GP) visits, Emergency Room (ER) visits, hospitalizations, and productivity loss. RESULTS: According to the NHS-P, the annual cost for managing influenza or I-LSs amounted to € 60.24, corresponding to € 38.71 per episode. About 72% of the cost was due to GP/ER visits and hospitalization; 22% to drugs, and 6% to vaccination. In the IF-P, the annual cost increased to € 249.70 (€ 140.33 per episode) and almost 90% of the cost was related to workdays lost, while only 11% and 1.3% were due to drugs and vaccination, respectively. Annual cost was highly related to the mean duration of influenza or I-LSs episodes in both perspectives (€ 111─388 in IF-P and € 56─68 in NHS-P). Furthermore, the number of workdays lost due to these episodes showed a significant impact on the overall cost (€ 195─304) only in the NHS-P. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza and I-LSs have a not negligible economic impact, both for the NHS and for the society. Resource consumption is considerable in the NHS-P, while the productivity loss due to people absenteeism causes the most relevant impact in the IF-P.

Updated cost-effectiveness analysis of supplemental glutamine for parenteral nutrition of intensive-care patients.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Intravenous (i.v.) glutamine supplementation of parenteral nutrition (PN) can improve clinical outcomes, reduce mortality and infection rates and shorten the length of hospital and/or intensive care unit (ICU) stays compared with standard PN. This study is a pharmacoeconomic analysis to determine whether i.v. glutamine supplementation of PN remains both a highly favourable and cost-effective option for Italian ICU patients. SUBJECTS/METHODS: A previously published discrete event simulation model was updated by incorporating the most up-to-date and clinically relevant efficacy data (a clinically realistic subgroup analysis from a published meta-analysis), recent cost data from the Italian health-care system and the latest epidemiology data from a large Italian ICU database (covering 230 Italian ICUs and more than 77,000 patients). Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the results. RESULTS: Parenteral glutamine supplementation can significantly improve ICU efficiency in Italy, as the additional cost of supplemented treatment is more than completely offset by cost savings in hospital care. Supplementation was more cost-effective (cost-effectiveness ratio (CER)=[euro ]35,165 per patient discharged alive) than standard, non-supplemented PN (CER=[euro ]40,156 per patient discharged alive), and it resulted in mean cost savings of [euro ]4991 per patient discharged alive or [euro ]1047 per patient admitted to the hospital. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these results. CONCLUSIONS: Alanyl-glutamine supplementation of PN is a clinically and economically attractive strategy for ICU patients in Italy and may be applicable to selected ICU patient populations in other countries.