Comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of theophylline and ipratropium bromide in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; A three-center study

A. Jubran; N. Gross; J. Ramsdell; R. Simonian; K. Schuttenhelm; M. Sax; D. J. Kaniecki; R. J.G. Arnold; F. A. Sonnenberg

doi:10.1378/chest.103.3.678

Comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of theophylline and ipratropium bromide in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; A three-center study

A. Jubran, N. Gross, J. Ramsdell, R. Simonian, K. Schuttenhelm, M. Sax, D. J. Kaniecki, R. J.G. Arnold, F. A. Sonnenberg

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

34 Scopus citations

Abstract

The charts of 311 patients receiving theophylline (T) and 289 patients receiving ipratropium bromide (IB) for COPD were reviewed to determine the total costs and cost-effectiveness of these 2 agents in 3 different health- care settings. A direct cost-accounting method assessed cost, and a Markov decision-analysis model calculated cost-effectiveness. Costs to treat toxic effects were greater for T versus IB. The types and incidences of toxic effects, by drug, were similar among the three centers. Overall costs for T were $121.40 per patient per therapy-month versus $84.56 per patient per therapy-month for IB, as determined by the cost-accounting method. The marginal cost was $366 for T over IB when extrapolated over 1 year using the Markov model. The Markov model also predicted that patients receiving IB had a greater number of complication-free therapy-months (measurement of effectiveness) than patients receiving T. We conclude that treatment with IB was less costly and more cost-effective than T.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	678-684
Number of pages	7
Journal	Chest
Volume	103
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.103.3.678
State	Published - 1993
Externally published	Yes

Access to Document

10.1378/chest.103.3.678

Cite this

@article{ff2e30ccecad449393729450a8f26853,

title = "Comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of theophylline and ipratropium bromide in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; A three-center study",

abstract = "The charts of 311 patients receiving theophylline (T) and 289 patients receiving ipratropium bromide (IB) for COPD were reviewed to determine the total costs and cost-effectiveness of these 2 agents in 3 different health- care settings. A direct cost-accounting method assessed cost, and a Markov decision-analysis model calculated cost-effectiveness. Costs to treat toxic effects were greater for T versus IB. The types and incidences of toxic effects, by drug, were similar among the three centers. Overall costs for T were \$121.40 per patient per therapy-month versus \$84.56 per patient per therapy-month for IB, as determined by the cost-accounting method. The marginal cost was \$366 for T over IB when extrapolated over 1 year using the Markov model. The Markov model also predicted that patients receiving IB had a greater number of complication-free therapy-months (measurement of effectiveness) than patients receiving T. We conclude that treatment with IB was less costly and more cost-effective than T.",

author = "A. Jubran and N. Gross and J. Ramsdell and R. Simonian and K. Schuttenhelm and M. Sax and Kaniecki, \{D. J.\} and Arnold, \{R. J.G.\} and Sonnenberg, \{F. A.\}",

note = "Funding Information: Supported in part by a grant from Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Danbury, Conn, by grant LM05266 from the National Library of Medicine, and by grant HS06396 from the Agency for Healthcare Policy and Research. ",

year = "1993",

doi = "10.1378/chest.103.3.678",

language = "English",

volume = "103",

pages = "678--684",

journal = "Chest",

issn = "0012-3692",

publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of theophylline and ipratropium bromide in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; A three-center study

AU - Jubran, A.

AU - Gross, N.

AU - Ramsdell, J.

AU - Simonian, R.

AU - Schuttenhelm, K.

AU - Sax, M.

AU - Kaniecki, D. J.

AU - Arnold, R. J.G.

AU - Sonnenberg, F. A.

N1 - Funding Information: Supported in part by a grant from Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Danbury, Conn, by grant LM05266 from the National Library of Medicine, and by grant HS06396 from the Agency for Healthcare Policy and Research.

PY - 1993

Y1 - 1993

N2 - The charts of 311 patients receiving theophylline (T) and 289 patients receiving ipratropium bromide (IB) for COPD were reviewed to determine the total costs and cost-effectiveness of these 2 agents in 3 different health- care settings. A direct cost-accounting method assessed cost, and a Markov decision-analysis model calculated cost-effectiveness. Costs to treat toxic effects were greater for T versus IB. The types and incidences of toxic effects, by drug, were similar among the three centers. Overall costs for T were $121.40 per patient per therapy-month versus $84.56 per patient per therapy-month for IB, as determined by the cost-accounting method. The marginal cost was $366 for T over IB when extrapolated over 1 year using the Markov model. The Markov model also predicted that patients receiving IB had a greater number of complication-free therapy-months (measurement of effectiveness) than patients receiving T. We conclude that treatment with IB was less costly and more cost-effective than T.

AB - The charts of 311 patients receiving theophylline (T) and 289 patients receiving ipratropium bromide (IB) for COPD were reviewed to determine the total costs and cost-effectiveness of these 2 agents in 3 different health- care settings. A direct cost-accounting method assessed cost, and a Markov decision-analysis model calculated cost-effectiveness. Costs to treat toxic effects were greater for T versus IB. The types and incidences of toxic effects, by drug, were similar among the three centers. Overall costs for T were $121.40 per patient per therapy-month versus $84.56 per patient per therapy-month for IB, as determined by the cost-accounting method. The marginal cost was $366 for T over IB when extrapolated over 1 year using the Markov model. The Markov model also predicted that patients receiving IB had a greater number of complication-free therapy-months (measurement of effectiveness) than patients receiving T. We conclude that treatment with IB was less costly and more cost-effective than T.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0027408406

U2 - 10.1378/chest.103.3.678

DO - 10.1378/chest.103.3.678

M3 - Article

C2 - 8449051

AN - SCOPUS:0027408406

SN - 0012-3692

VL - 103

SP - 678

EP - 684

JO - Chest

JF - Chest

IS - 3

ER -

Comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of theophylline and ipratropium bromide in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; A three-center study

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this