IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rtv/ceisrp/356.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Treatment Plan Comparison in Obstructive Respiratory Disorders: an Observational Study of Doxofylline vs. Theophylline in the Marche Region

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Objectives - To estimate: a) the number of users of theophylline (ATC: R03DA04) and doxofylline (ATC: R03DA11) for the treatment of chronic asthma and/or COPD in adults, in the Marche Region (Italy); b) the global cost related to the use of the two drugs (associated drugs, specialist visits, hospital admissions, plasma drug monitoring). Methods - The drug prescriptions were extracted from the Information System of the Pharmaceutical Prescriptions of the Marche Region (PHARM), containing all the prescriptions sent by pharmacies within the region and reimbursed by the National Health Service. All the prescriptions for each ATC code in the years 2008-2012 were extracted and the number of prescriptions per year was obtained. The number of subjects receiving >1prescription of the ATC codesR03DA04 and R03DA11 was identified and the number of users was estimated. The concomitant drug number was estimated by selecting all the prescriptions for potentially associated ATCs dispensed 30 days before or after the first prescription of ATC codes. The price of prescriptions was calculated using the information "price" contained in the PHARM record. Results - For both drugs in the study period 13,574 patients were treated with theophylline (94,454 prescriptions) and 19,426 patients with doxofylline (62,791). The number of patients treated was approximately 5,000 per year. Both the number of patients and prescriptions declined during the period of study. The number of prescriptions of theophylline was higher in men, that of doxofylline higher in women. Both theophylline and doxofylline prescriptions increased with the age of patients. Co-prescription with other drugs was lower for doxofylline (1.55) than theophylline (5.50) in the total population (71.7% reduction). In the aged patients the reduction of doxofylline prescriptions versus theophylline was 66%. The use of corticosteroids associated with doxofylline was lower versus theophylline: a) in the total population (0.3 vs 0.7), b) in men (0.3 vs 0.9), c) in women (0.3 vs 0.6) and in aged patients (0.3 vs 0.8; 58.1% less). The mean number of specialist visits was lower in patients treated with doxofylline than in those treated with theophylline in the total population (2.05 vs 3.73), in men (2.38 vs 4.43), in women (1.75 vs 2.95) and aged people (2.52 vs 4.18). The mean number of hospital admissions (per 100 patients) was lower for patients treated with doxofylline than for those treated with theophylline in the total population (1.57 vs 3.3) and in aged people (1.94 vs 3.09). In the total population, the annual mean cost of global treatment per patient was €187.4 for those treated with doxofylline and €513.5 for theophylline, while in the aged people it was €247.7 (doxofylline) and €577.3 (theophylline). Conclusions - The PHARM allows to estimate drug utilization, taking into account the overall patient treatment plan. In our study, compared to theophylline, the prescription of doxofylline was associated less with prescriptions of other drugs, corticosteroids and specialized visits as well as hospital admissions. Therefore, doxofylline resulted to be associated with a reduction of the overall cost of the disease compared to theophylline.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Saverio Mennini & Paolo Sciattella & Andrea Marcellusi & Alberico Marcobelli & Alessandra Russo & Achille Patrizio Caputi, 2015. "Treatment Plan Comparison in Obstructive Respiratory Disorders: an Observational Study of Doxofylline vs. Theophylline in the Marche Region," CEIS Research Paper 356, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 13 Oct 2015.
  • Handle: RePEc:rtv:ceisrp:356
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ceistorvergata.it/RePEc/rpaper/RP356.pdf
    File Function: Main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    administrative database; Real world data; asthma; COPD;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    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:rtv:ceisrp:356. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Barbara Piazzi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csrotit.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.