Literature DB >> 10146972

Roxithromycin versus cefaclor in lower respiratory tract infection: a general practice pharmacoeconomic study.

W G Scott1, M W Tilyard, S M Dovey, B Cooper, H M Scott.   

Abstract

An economic evaluation comparing roxithromycin 150mg twice daily and cefaclor 250mg thrice daily in the treatment of lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) was undertaken as part of a randomised clinical trial in New Zealand general practice. The observed statistically significant difference in adverse events, withdrawal rates and extra treatment courses in favour of roxithromycin in the clinical study was translated into medical cost savings. Treatment failures, withdrawals or adverse events resulted in additional costs for 11 of 120 (9%) patients receiving roxithromycin and 19 of 118 (16%) patients receiving cefaclor. In these cases (treatment failures, withdrawals, adverse effects) additional antibiotics and general practitioner visits were required 3 times more often and the cost of additional medication for treating failure or adverse effects was 3 times higher for patients treated with cefaclor than for patients receiving roxithromycin. The total direct medical cost per patient treated with roxithromycin was $NZ9.37 lower (on an incremental basis) than for patients treated with cefaclor, despite a higher drug acquisition cost. An estimate of $NZ656 000 per year in total savings in direct medical costs could be made in New Zealand if roxithromycin were to replace all cefaclor prescriptions in the treatment of LRTI.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 10146972     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199304020-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  11 in total

1.  A once-daily oral antibiotic: the way ahead in community-acquired infection. A Roxithromycin Symposium presented at the 17th International Congress of Chemotherapy. Berlin, Germany, 23-27 June 1991.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1992 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.803

2.  The diagnostic profile of a South Australian rural practice.

Authors:  S T Liaw
Journal:  Aust Fam Physician       Date:  1991-02

Review 3.  The diagnostic content of general practice.

Authors:  C Munro
Journal:  Aust Fam Physician       Date:  1989-01

4.  A randomized double-blind controlled trial of roxithromycin and cefaclor in the treatment of acute lower respiratory tract infections in general practice.

Authors:  M W Tilyard; S M Dovey
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1992 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.803

5.  Why the patients came.

Authors:  R M Ridley-Smith
Journal:  N Z Med J       Date:  1973-09-26

6.  Cefaclor--summary of clinical experience.

Authors:  R B Kammer; L J Short
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 2.401

7.  Roxithromycin in the therapy of Streptococcus pyogenes throat infections.

Authors:  J M Herron
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 5.790

8.  Comparison of two oral antibiotics, roxithromycin and amoxicillin plus clavulanic acid, in lower respiratory tract infections.

Authors:  B Dautzenberg; A Scheimberg; C Brambilla; P Camus; P Godard; J C Guerin; E Lemarie; Y Rezvani; M Rosembaum; E Tuchais
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1992 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.803

Review 9.  Lower respiratory tract infections.

Authors:  A Billas
Journal:  Prim Care       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 2.907

10.  A placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of erythromycin in adults with acute bronchitis.

Authors:  J Dunlay; R Reinhardt; L D Roi
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  1987-08       Impact factor: 0.493

View more
  10 in total

1.  Economic evaluation of antibacterials in the treatment of acute sinusitis.

Authors:  C Laurier; J Lachaine; M Ducharme
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Roxithromycin vs cefaclor.

Authors:  T Hughes; W G Scott; H M Scott
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  Costs, innovation and efficiency in anti-infective therapy.

Authors:  J L Bootman; R J Milne
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  Formulary management of macrolide antibiotics.

Authors:  D R Guay
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Cost effectiveness of roxithromycin versus cefaclor in Australia.

Authors:  W G Scott; B C Cooper; H M Scott; M W Tilyard; S M Dovey
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Defining criteria for the pharmacoeconomic evaluation of new oral cephalosporins.

Authors:  P G Davey; M Malek
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 7.  Cost-effective treatment of lower respiratory tract infections.

Authors:  J C Garrelts; A M Herrington
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Roxithromycin 150 mg b.i.d. versus amoxycillin 500 mg/clavulanic acid 125 mg t.i.d. for the treatment of lower respiratory tract infections in general practice.

Authors:  N C Karalus; J E Garrett; S D Lang; R A Leng; G N Kostalas; R T Cursons; B C Cooper; C J Ryan
Journal:  Infection       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 3.553

9.  Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of roxithromycin versus amoxycillin/clavulanic acid in a community-acquired lower respiratory tract infection study.

Authors:  W G Scott; B C Cooper; H M Scott
Journal:  Infection       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 3.553

Review 10.  Roxithromycin. An update of its antimicrobial activity, pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic use.

Authors:  A Markham; D Faulds
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 9.546

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.