IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v14y1998i6p671-684.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Formoterol Versus Salmeterol in Patients with Asthma

Author

Listed:
  • Maureen Mölken

    ()

  • Eddy Doorslaer
  • M. Till

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the relative economic consequences of treating asthmatics with twice daily dry powder formoterol 12mg as compared with salmeterol 50mg from a societal perspective. Design and Setting: A randomised, 6-month, open-label study including 482 patients with asthma was conducted in Italy, Spain, France, Switzerland, the UK and Sweden. Medical costs included the costs of medications, physician services, emergency room visits, hospital admissions and lung function and other tests. Travel costs and costs of production loss were also calculated. Unit prices were estimated from external sources. To pool the costs of the 6 countries, European currencies were converted to US dollars using 1995 exchange rates. Outcome measures were the number of episode-free days (EFDs) and the number of patients reaching a clinically relevant improvement in quality of life as measured using the St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire. Main outcome measures and results: There were no significant differences between the 2 treatment arms in the frequency of emergency room visits, hospital admissions, use of rescue medication or contacts with general practitioners (GPs), specialists or nurses. Median medical costs over 6 months were $US828 per patient with formoterol and $US850 with salmeterol. This difference was not statistically significant. In both groups, about 60% of all days were episode-free. Average costs per EFD were about $US9 for both treatments. The average cost per patient reaching a clinically relevant improvement in quality of life was between $US1300 and $US1400. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were not calculated because both costs and outcomes were not significantly different. Asthma-related absenteeism ranged between 3 days and 6 months per patient in both groups. Conclusions: There was no evidence to suggest that either treatment was more cost effective than the other. Copyright Adis international Limited 1998

Suggested Citation

  • Maureen Mölken & Eddy Doorslaer & M. Till, 1998. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Formoterol Versus Salmeterol in Patients with Asthma," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 14(6), pages 671-684, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:14:y:1998:i:6:p:671-684
    DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199814060-00007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/00019053-199814060-00007
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Jonsson, Bengt, 1991. "Conversion factor instability in international comparisons of health care expenditure," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 227-234, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Richard Grieve & Richard Nixon & Simon G. Thompson & Charles Normand, 2005. "Using multilevel models for assessing the variability of multinational resource use and cost data," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(2), pages 185-196, February.
    2. Lan Gao & Hao Hu & Fei-Li Zhao & Shu-Chuen Li, 2016. "Can the Direct Medical Cost of Chronic Disease Be Transferred across Different Countries? Using Cost-of-Illness Studies on Type 2 Diabetes, Epilepsy and Schizophrenia as Examples," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:14:y:1998:i:6:p:671-684. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.