Literature DB >> 12068338

Economic evaluation of the MEDENOX trial: a Canadian perspective. Medical Patients with Enoxaparin.

André Lamy1, Xiaoyin Wang, Rosanne Kent, Kelly M Smith, Amiram Gafni.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To perform an economic evaluation of the Prophylaxis in Medical Patients with Enoxaparin (MEDENOX) trial from a Canadian perspective.
METHOD: Using a decision tree model, cost effectiveness analysis was carried out to compare the costs and consequences of thromboprophylaxis using enoxaparin 40 mg with placebo in tertiary and community settings. From a third party payer's perspective, the model calculated the expected rate of symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE), and the total expected cost of prophylaxis and VTE management, including inpatient and outpatient treatment, professional fees and long term therapy. Data were derived directly from the MEDENOX trial. Costs are direct medical costs in year 2000 Canadian dollars.
RESULTS: In a tertiary setting in which the estimated inpatient to outpatient deep vein thrombosis treatment ratio was 10%:90%, the total expected cost per patient was 64 dollars in the enoxaparin group and 62 dollars in the placebo group. The expected symptomatic VTE rates were 0.8% and 3.1% in the enoxaparin and placebo groups, respectively. The incremental cost effectiveness of enoxaparin 40 mg versus placebo was 87 dollars/VTE avoided. In a community hospital setting (with a 50%:50% inpatient to outpatient deep vein thrombosis treatment ratio), the total expected cost per patient was 68 dollars in the enoxaparin group compared with 72 dollars in the placebo group, indicating that prophylaxis with enoxaparin 40 mg was cost saving. The model was sensitive to the inpatient to outpatient ratio. However, within each setting, the results were not sensitive to changes in key variables.
CONCLUSION: For patients hospitalized for acute respiratory failure, congestive heart failure or acute infectious disease and who are at moderate risk of developing VTE, thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin 40 mg daily is a cost effective strategy in both tertiary and community settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12068338     DOI: 10.1155/2002/310841

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Respir J        ISSN: 1198-2241            Impact factor:   2.409


  13 in total

1.  Economic evaluation of enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients.

Authors:  Robin Offord; Adam C Lloyd; Pippa Anderson; Andy Bearne
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  2004-08

2.  Prevention of VTE in nonsurgical patients: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  Susan R Kahn; Wendy Lim; Andrew S Dunn; Mary Cushman; Francesco Dentali; Elie A Akl; Deborah J Cook; Alex A Balekian; Russell C Klein; Hoang Le; Sam Schulman; M Hassan Murad
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 9.410

3.  A cost comparison of off-pump CABG versus on-pump CABG at one-year: The Canadian off-pump CABG registry.

Authors:  Andre Lamy; Xiaoyin Wang; Forough Farrokhyar; Rosanne Kent
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 5.223

4.  Thromboprophylaxis for lung cancer patients--multimodality assessment of clinician practices, perceptions and decision support tools.

Authors:  M Alexander; S Kirsa; M MacManus; D Ball; B Solomon; K Burbury
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2014-02-27       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Cost effectiveness of enoxaparin as prophylaxis against venous thromboembolic complications in acutely ill medical inpatients: modelling study from the hospital perspective in Germany.

Authors:  Peter K Schädlich; Michael Kentsch; Manfred Weber; Wolfgang Kämmerer; Josef Georg Brecht; Vijay Nadipelli; Eduard Huppertz
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  A decision model to estimate a risk threshold for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients.

Authors:  P Le; K A Martinez; M A Pappas; M B Rothberg
Journal:  J Thromb Haemost       Date:  2017-05-03       Impact factor: 5.824

Review 7.  Enoxaparin: a review of its use as thromboprophylaxis in acutely ill, nonsurgical patients.

Authors:  M Asif A Siddiqui; Antona J Wagstaff
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 9.546

8.  American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prophylaxis for hospitalized and nonhospitalized medical patients.

Authors:  Holger J Schünemann; Mary Cushman; Allison E Burnett; Susan R Kahn; Jan Beyer-Westendorf; Frederick A Spencer; Suely M Rezende; Neil A Zakai; Kenneth A Bauer; Francesco Dentali; Jill Lansing; Sara Balduzzi; Andrea Darzi; Gian Paolo Morgano; Ignacio Neumann; Robby Nieuwlaat; Juan J Yepes-Nuñez; Yuan Zhang; Wojtek Wiercioch
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2018-11-27

9.  Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis on General Internal Medicine Units: Are Patients Well Served by Current Practice?

Authors:  Allison Mejilla; Micheal Guirguis; Sheri Koshman; Tammy J Bungard
Journal:  Can J Hosp Pharm       Date:  2017-06-30

10.  American Society of Hematology 2021 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prevention and treatment in patients with cancer.

Authors:  Gary H Lyman; Marc Carrier; Cihan Ay; Marcello Di Nisio; Lisa K Hicks; Alok A Khorana; Andrew D Leavitt; Agnes Y Y Lee; Fergus Macbeth; Rebecca L Morgan; Simon Noble; Elizabeth A Sexton; David Stenehjem; Wojtek Wiercioch; Lara A Kahale; Pablo Alonso-Coello
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2021-02-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.