RESUMO
Purpose: To assess the direct and indirect costs associated with adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in patients receiving treatment regimens for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and tuberculosis (TB) in selected Thai hospitals. Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective study conducted between October 2014 and September 2019 at three public hospitals in Thailand. Data were obtained from a medical database and spontaneous ADR reporting system of each study site. The out-of-pocket health payments and indirect costs were determined via interviewing. All costs were updated to 2021. Results: A total of 432 eligible patients who experienced ADRs due to HIV and TB treatment, and 93 patients were interviewed to determine direct non-medical and indirect costs. The average direct medical cost for ADR was USD 5.65 for mild cases, USD 156.54 for moderate cases, and USD 1,242.45 for severe cases. For direct non-medical costs, the average cost per episode was USD 27.29 in mild ADR, USD 70.86 in moderate ADR and USD 270.66 in severe ADR. The indirect cost incurred in each mild, moderate and severe ADR was USD 41.86, USD 89.34, and USD 552.60, respectively. The Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) had the highest management costs. Conclusion: ADRs associated with anti-tuberculosis drugs and antiretroviral drugs seem to have a substantial economic impact from a societal perspective. These findings would be useful for increasing awareness and encouraging early avoidance of ADRs.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The national essential drug committee in Thailand suggested that only one of thiazolidinediones be included in hospital formulary but little was know about their cost-effectiveness values. This study aims to determine an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of pioglitazone 45 mg compared with rosiglitazone 8 mg in uncontrolled type 2 diabetic patients receiving sulfonylureas and metformin in Thailand. METHODS: A Markov diabetes model (Center for Outcome Research model) was used in this study. Baseline characteristics of patients were based on Thai diabetes registry project. Costs of diabetes were calculated mainly from Buddhachinaraj hospital. Nonspecific mortality rate and transition probabilities of death from renal replacement therapy were obtained from Thai sources. Clinical effectiveness of thiazolidinediones was retrieved from a meta-analysis. All analyses were based on the government hospital policymaker perspective. Both cost and outcomes were discounted with the rate of 3%. Base-case analyses were analyzed as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. A series of sensitive analyses were performed. RESULTS: In base-case analysis, the pioglitazone group had a better clinical outcomes and higher lifetime costs. The incremental cost per QALY gained was 186,246 baht (US$ 5389). The acceptability curves showed that the probability of pioglitazone being cost-effective was 29% at the willingness to pay of one time of Thai gross domestic product per capita (GDP per capita). The effect of pioglitazone on %HbA1c decrease was the most sensitive to the final outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings showed that in type 2 diabetic patients who cannot control their blood glucose under the combination of sulfonylurea and metformin, the use of pioglitazone 45 mg fell in the cost-effective range recommended by World Health Organization (one to three times of GDP per capita) on average, compared to rosiglitazone 8 mg. Nevertheless, based on sensitivity analysis, its probability of being cost-effective was quite low. Hospital policymakers may consider our findings as part of information for the decision-making process.
