J Thornton1, R A Elliott, M P Tully, M Dodd, A K Webb. 1. School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Manchester M13 9PL, UK. judith.thornton@manchester.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A cost-effectiveness evaluation comparing home-based and hospital-based treatment with intravenous antibiotics for respiratory exacerbations in adults with cystic fibrosis (CF) has not been previously undertaken. METHODS: The study was conducted in a UK adult CF centre from a health service perspective. Clinical outcome and resource use data were obtained from a retrospective one-year study and combined with unit cost data in an incremental economic analysis. The primary outcome measure was percentage change in FEV(1); "effectiveness" was defined as maintenance of baseline average FEV(1) over the one-year study period. RESULTS: 116 patients received 454 courses of intravenous antibiotics. At the end of 1 year, there had been a mean percentage decline in FEV(1) compared with baseline average for home-treated patients but an improvement for hospital-treated patients (Tukey's HSD mean difference 10.1%, 95% CI 2.9 to 17.2, p = 0.003). Treatment was deemed "effective" in more hospital (58.8%) than home (42.6%) patients. The cost of hospital treatment was higher than home treatment (mean difference 9,005 pounds, 95% CI 3,507 to 14,700, p<0.001). The mean ICER was 46,098 pounds (2.5th and 97.5th percentiles -374,044 and 362,472). CONCLUSIONS: Hospital treatment was more effective but more expensive than home treatment. Potential methods to improve outcome at home should be considered but these may have resource implications.
BACKGROUND: A cost-effectiveness evaluation comparing home-based and hospital-based treatment with intravenous antibiotics for respiratory exacerbations in adults with cystic fibrosis (CF) has not been previously undertaken. METHODS: The study was conducted in a UK adult CF centre from a health service perspective. Clinical outcome and resource use data were obtained from a retrospective one-year study and combined with unit cost data in an incremental economic analysis. The primary outcome measure was percentage change in FEV(1); "effectiveness" was defined as maintenance of baseline average FEV(1) over the one-year study period. RESULTS: 116 patients received 454 courses of intravenous antibiotics. At the end of 1 year, there had been a mean percentage decline in FEV(1) compared with baseline average for home-treated patients but an improvement for hospital-treated patients (Tukey's HSD mean difference 10.1%, 95% CI 2.9 to 17.2, p = 0.003). Treatment was deemed "effective" in more hospital (58.8%) than home (42.6%) patients. The cost of hospital treatment was higher than home treatment (mean difference 9,005 pounds, 95% CI 3,507 to 14,700, p<0.001). The mean ICER was 46,098 pounds (2.5th and 97.5th percentiles -374,044 and 362,472). CONCLUSIONS: Hospital treatment was more effective but more expensive than home treatment. Potential methods to improve outcome at home should be considered but these may have resource implications.
Authors: J Michael Collaco; Deanna M Green; Garry R Cutting; Kathleen M Naughton; Peter J Mogayzel Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2010-06-25 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Paul Tappenden; Sue Harnan; Lesley Uttley; Matthew Mildred; Martin Walshaw; Christopher Taylor; Keith Brownlee Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 4.981
Authors: Heena Khiroya; Rebecca Pound; Ushna Qureshi; Catherine Brown; Joanne Barrett; Rifat Rashid; Joanna L Whitehouse; Alice M Turner; Edward F Nash Journal: Open Respir Med J Date: 2015-02-25
Authors: Pallavi Bedi; Manjit K Sidhu; Lucienne S Donaldson; James D Chalmers; Maeve P Smith; Kim Turnbull; Joanna L Pentland; Jenny Scott; Adam T Hill Journal: NPJ Prim Care Respir Med Date: 2014-10-23 Impact factor: 2.871