Economic analysis of alvimopan for prevention and management of postoperative ileus.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether alvimopan for prevention of postoperative ileus in patients undergoing small- or large-bowel resection by laparotomy is associated with lower total costs compared with standard care. DESIGN: Pharmacoeconomic analysis using a formal decision model. DATA SOURCE: Four phase III clinical trials, two pooled analyses, and one meta-analysis. PATIENT POPULATION: A cohort of patients who underwent bowel resection with primary anastomosis by laparotomy and received either standardized, accelerated postoperative care (usual care) or usual care plus alvimopan. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Clinical outcomes, obtained from pooled analyses of published studies, were time to discharge order written, postoperative nasogastric tube insertion, postoperative ileus-related readmission within 7 days, and occurrence of nausea and vomiting. Cost inputs included drugs, nursing labor, readmissions, and hospitalizations. Costs were assessed by determining the net cost of alvimopan use and subsequent reduction in length of stay. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted. Costs for alvimopan were $570 based on an average of 9.5 doses. Given the 18.4-hour mean reduction in time to discharge order written, use of alvimopan reduced hospitalization costs by $2021. Mean difference in overall cost of care, as determined by Monte Carlo simulation, was $1168 (95% certainty interval -$437 to $5879), favoring the use of alvimopan. In the sensitivity analysis, association of alvimopan with lower costs was robust to several changes in key parameters including cost and number of doses of alvimopan, time to discharge order written, readmission rates, and hospitalization cost. In the scenario analyses, alvimopan use yielded a net cost of $226 when no difference in time to discharge order written was assumed. In the scenario analysis using data from a study that did not enforce opioid use, alvimopan resulted in a cost saving of $65/patient. CONCLUSION: Alvimopan was cost saving for prevention of postoperative ileus in patients undergoing bowel resection by laparotomy, although these potential cost savings were highly dependent on a difference in time to discharge order written. This finding is not applicable to the less-invasive laparoscopic surgical approach for which quality data on alvimopan use are lacking. Limitations of this analysis included use of time to discharge order written as a proxy for length of stay and difficulty interpreting study results due to inconsistent reporting and conduct of the clinical trials evaluating alvimopan. More research is needed to determine the cost-effectiveness of alvimopan.

Anticoagulation therapy for hospitalized patients: patterns of use, compliance with national guidelines, and performance on quality measures.

PURPOSE: The use of anticoagulant therapy for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) among hospital inpatients was evaluated. METHODS: Medication-use data were retrospectively collected on 1716 patients who received anticoagulants for VTE or ACS at 42 community hospitals during the period April-June 2009; all hospitals in the sample were members of the same large health care organization. Descriptive analyses were performed to characterize anticoagulant use, patient safety, compliance with national prescribing guidelines, and performance on relevant Joint Commission quality measures. RESULTS: The most common indications for anticoagulant use were VTE prophylaxis (67.5% of cases), ACS (13.5% of cases), and VTE treatment (11.9% of cases). The agents most commonly used for VTE prophylaxis were subcutaneous enoxaparin (70% of cases) and subcutaneous unfractionated heparin (UFH). Overall, the anticoagulant regimen used was consistent with national prescribing guidelines in 67.5% of cases; however, rates of appropriate prescribing were lower in subgroups of patients with renal impairment, obesity, or both (63.6%, 42.5%, and 63.6%, respectively). Reported anticoagulant-related adverse events during the study period mainly involved minor or major bleeding, which occurred in 36% and 32% of cases, respectively. Compliance with Joint Commission core measures ranged from 49.1% for core measure VTE-3 (warfarin overlap therapy) to 72.3% for VTE-4 (monitoring of UFH dosages and platelet counts by protocol). CONCLUSION: Among hospitals in a large national health care system, the most common use of anticoagulants in hospitalized patients was for VTE prevention, followed by ACS and VTE treatment. Enoxaparin and UFH were the most commonly used agents for each indication, and the selection and use of anticoagulants were in compliance with national guidelines in the majority of patients for whom those drugs were prescribed.