Literature DB >> 11702897

Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of sumatriptan in patients with migraine.

J H Lofland1, S S Kim, A S Batenhorst, N E Johnson, M L Chatterton, R K Cady, R Kaniecki, D B Nash.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of initiating sumatriptan therapy in patients with acute migraine who were previously taking nontriptan drugs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is an economic analysis of a prospective, pretest-posttest, observational 6-month outcomes study of 178 patients with a physician diagnosis of migraine who received their first prescription for sumatriptan between October 1994 and August 1996 and were members of a mixed-model managed care organization in western Pennsylvania. Migraine-related resource use data were obtained from the managed care organization's medical and pharmacy claims databases. The primary outcome measure for this economic analysis was the total disability time that patients experienced because of migraine. Patients reported time missed from work and usual nonwork activities because of migraine on self-administered questionnaires at baseline and at 3 and 6 months after initiation of sumatriptan.
RESULTS: Initiation of sumatriptan resulted in a decrease of 662 migraine-disability-days for work and 1236 migraine-disability-days for nonwork activities during the 6 months of the study (decrease from 27.8 to 17.2 days per person), totaling 1898 migraine-disability-days averted with sumatriptan therapy. Migraine-related medical costs were lower after sumatriptan was initiated ($18,351 vs $26,192), whereas migraine-related pharmacy costs were lower with prior nontriptan drug therapy ($22,209 vs $74,861). The overall net cost savings after sumatriptan was initiated in these patients was $222,332 ($1249 per patient) with a benefit-to-cost ratio of $5.67 gained for each health care dollar spent from a societal perspective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $25 for each additional migraine-disability-day averted by using sumatriptan vs nontriptan drug therapy. Sensitivity analysis showed that changes in medical costs had little effect on the ratios and that sumatriptan remained cost-beneficial across a wide range of patient wages.
CONCLUSION: This study showed that initiation of sumatriptan in patients previously receiving nontriptan therapy was cost-effective and had an economic benefit for patients, employers, and society. Sumatriptan also helped patients and physicians achieve goals recommended by the US Headache Consortium by reducing patients' disability and thus improving their ability to function at work and nonwork activities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11702897     DOI: 10.4065/76.11.1093

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc        ISSN: 0025-6196            Impact factor:   7.616


  8 in total

Review 1.  A review of health-related workplace productivity loss instruments.

Authors:  Jennifer H Lofland; Laura Pizzi; Kevin D Frick
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  The impact of migraine and the effect of migraine treatment on workplace productivity in the United States and suggestions for future research.

Authors:  Wayne N Burton; Stephen H Landy; Kristen E Downs; M Chris Runken
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 7.616

Review 3.  Oral serotonin receptor agonists: a review of their cost effectiveness in migraine.

Authors:  Jennifer H Lofland; David B Nash
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of rizatriptan and sumatriptan versus Cafergot in the acute treatment of migraine.

Authors:  Lihua Zhang; Joel W Hay
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 5.749

5.  Different approaches to valuing the lost productivity of patients with migraine.

Authors:  J H Lofland; J C Locklear; K D Frick
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 6.  Migraine headache: options for acute treatment.

Authors:  Frederick R Taylor
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 5.081

Review 7.  Economic evaluations of occupational health interventions from a company's perspective: a systematic review of methods to estimate the cost of health-related productivity loss.

Authors:  Kimi Uegaki; Martine C de Bruijne; Allard J van der Beek; Willem van Mechelen; Maurits W van Tulder
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2011-03

Review 8.  A systematic review of the psychosocial difficulties relevant to patients with migraine.

Authors:  Alberto Raggi; Ambra Mara Giovannetti; Rui Quintas; Domenico D'Amico; Alarcos Cieza; Carla Sabariego; Jerome Edmound Bickenbach; Matilde Leonardi
Journal:  J Headache Pain       Date:  2012-09-23       Impact factor: 7.277

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.