A Sicras-Mainar1, J Rejas-Gutiérrez2, R Navarro-Artieda3, A Aguado-Jodar4, A Ruíz-Torrejón5. 1. Dirección de Planificación, Badalona Serveis Assistencials SA, Badalona, Barcelona, España. Electronic address: asicras@bsa.cat. 2. Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Pfizer SLU, Alcobendas, Madrid, España. 3. Documentación Médica, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Barcelona, España. 4. CAP Sagrada Familia, Consorci Sanitari Integral, Barcelona, España. 5. Dirección de Atención Primaria, Servicio Balear de Salud, Ib-Salut, Mallorca, España.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of resources and health costs in vulnerable elderly institutionalized patients with overactive bladder (OAB) treated with fesoterodine, tolterodine or solifenacin in routine medical practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study, from the records of patients treated during 2008-2010 in three geographical locations and starting treatment with antimuscarinic (fesoterodine, solifenacin and tolterodine) for OAB. The attribute of vulnerability was based on collecting at least 3 of the Vulnerable Elders Survey criteria-13, age>75 years, poor/average age for health and difficulty in at least one daily physical activity. MAIN MEASURES: morbidity, persistence and resource use and costs. Monitoring of patients was conducted over 52 weeks. A general linear model with covariates and bootstraping (1000) at random was used to construct the 95% CI of the cost differences between drugs. RESULTS: Records of 552 patients (50.8% women, mean age: 80.2 years) were analyzed. Treated with fesoterodine (N=58), solifenacin (N=252) or tolterodine (N=212). The use of absorbent was 20.7%, 29.4% and 33.0% (P=.186), respectively. Persistence to treatment was slightly greater with fesoterodine. The patient healthcare costs/year were lower with fesoterodine, €1,775 (1550-2014) vs. solifenacin €2,062 (1911-2223) and tolterodine €2,149 (1,978-2,307), P=.042, as a result of lower utilization visits and concomitant medication. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the potential limitations of the study, the vulnerable elderly non institutionalized patients with OAB treated with fesoterodine, compared to solifenacin or tolterodine were associated with lower resource utilization and healthcare costs.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of resources and health costs in vulnerable elderly institutionalized patients with overactive bladder (OAB) treated with fesoterodine, tolterodine or solifenacin in routine medical practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study, from the records of patients treated during 2008-2010 in three geographical locations and starting treatment with antimuscarinic (fesoterodine, solifenacin and tolterodine) for OAB. The attribute of vulnerability was based on collecting at least 3 of the Vulnerable Elders Survey criteria-13, age>75 years, poor/average age for health and difficulty in at least one daily physical activity. MAIN MEASURES: morbidity, persistence and resource use and costs. Monitoring of patients was conducted over 52 weeks. A general linear model with covariates and bootstraping (1000) at random was used to construct the 95% CI of the cost differences between drugs. RESULTS: Records of 552 patients (50.8% women, mean age: 80.2 years) were analyzed. Treated with fesoterodine (N=58), solifenacin (N=252) or tolterodine (N=212). The use of absorbent was 20.7%, 29.4% and 33.0% (P=.186), respectively. Persistence to treatment was slightly greater with fesoterodine. The patient healthcare costs/year were lower with fesoterodine, €1,775 (1550-2014) vs. solifenacin €2,062 (1911-2223) and tolterodine €2,149 (1,978-2,307), P=.042, as a result of lower utilization visits and concomitant medication. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the potential limitations of the study, the vulnerable elderly non institutionalized patients with OAB treated with fesoterodine, compared to solifenacin or tolterodine were associated with lower resource utilization and healthcare costs.
Authors: Carmen Peral; Francisco Sánchez-Ballester; José M García-Mediero; Jaime Ramos; Javier Rejas Journal: Clinicoecon Outcomes Res Date: 2016-09-26