Literature DB >> 8930434

A pharmacoeconomic evaluation of intravenous fosphenytoin (Cerebyx) versus intravenous phenytoin (Dilantin) in hospital emergency departments.

A Marchetti1, R Magar, J Fischer, E Sloan, P Fischer.   

Abstract

The cost of emergency department services has become a major concern for patients, providers, and payers. Solid economic information is needed to provide a rationale for the selection of therapeutic options and the provision of care that is both clinically and financially prudent. To assess the full cost of care for patients with seizures who are treated in an acute care setting, a modified activity-based cost-accounting model was developed. The model was populated with data from a double-masked, parallel-group, single-dose, multicenter clinical trial designed to investigate the safety and tolerability of phenytoin (Dilantin) and fosphenytoin (Cerebyx) given intravenously in equivalent loading doses according to established recommendations. A total of 52 patients were enrolled in the trial; 13 were given phenytoin and 39 were given fosphenytoin. Salaries and benefits of emergency medical services personnel, drug acquisition costs, and direct and indirect overhead expenditures common to a large hospital emergency department comprised the total costs to treat enrolled patients and manage adverse events. The average cost to treat patients with fosphenytoin was lower than the cost to treat similar patients with phenytoin based on the frequency of adverse events associated with each comparator and the resources (human and material) consumed in the management of those events.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8930434     DOI: 10.1016/s0149-2918(96)80051-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Ther        ISSN: 0149-2918            Impact factor:   3.393


  7 in total

1.  Convulsive Status Epilepticus.

Authors: 
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Neurol       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 3.598

Review 2.  Fosphenytoin: clinical pharmacokinetics and comparative advantages in the acute treatment of seizures.

Authors:  James H Fischer; Tejal V Patel; Patricia A Fischer
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 3.  Fosphenytoin and phenytoin in patients with status epilepticus: improved tolerability versus increased costs.

Authors:  J C DeToledo; R E Ramsay
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 4.  Fosphenytoin. Pharmacoeconomic implications of therapy.

Authors:  S M Holliday; P Benfield; G L Plosker
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 5.  Prescribing antiepileptic drugs: should patients be switched on the basis of cost?

Authors:  Barbara C Jobst; Gregory L Holmes
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 5.749

Review 6.  Cardiovascular adverse effects of phenytoin.

Authors:  B Guldiken; J Rémi; Soheyl Noachtar
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2015-12-08       Impact factor: 4.849

7.  Fosphenytoin for the treatment of status epilepticus: an evidence-based assessment of its clinical and economic outcomes.

Authors:  Andrew Thomson
Journal:  Core Evid       Date:  2005-03-31
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.