Advanced

Costs of on-demand and prophylactic treatment for severe haemophilia in Norway and Sweden.

Steen Carlsson, Katarina LU ; Höjgård, Sören LU ; Lindgren, Anna LU ; Lethagen, Stefan LU ; Schulman, S.; Glomstein, A.; Tengborn, Lilian LU ; Berntorp, Erik LU and Lindgren, Björn LU (2004) In Haemophilia 10(5). p.515-526
Abstract
The expected annual cost (in the year 2000 prices) for a 30-year-old patient with average individual and treatment characteristics for on-demand EUR 51 832 (95% CI: 44 324-59 341) and for prophylaxis EUR 146 118 (95% CI: 129 965-162 271), was obtained from panel-data analysis of an 11-year retrospective panel of 156 patients with severe haemophilia in Norway and Sweden. Costs included haemophilia-related treatment costs within the health-care sector (factor concentrate, doctors' visits, diagnostic procedures, hospitalisation, invasive procedures, etc.) and cost for haemophilia-related resource use in other sectors (lost production, use of special equipment, adaptation of workplace and domicile, etc). Although costs of lost production,... (More)
The expected annual cost (in the year 2000 prices) for a 30-year-old patient with average individual and treatment characteristics for on-demand EUR 51 832 (95% CI: 44 324-59 341) and for prophylaxis EUR 146 118 (95% CI: 129 965-162 271), was obtained from panel-data analysis of an 11-year retrospective panel of 156 patients with severe haemophilia in Norway and Sweden. Costs included haemophilia-related treatment costs within the health-care sector (factor concentrate, doctors' visits, diagnostic procedures, hospitalisation, invasive procedures, etc.) and cost for haemophilia-related resource use in other sectors (lost production, use of special equipment, adaptation of workplace and domicile, etc). Although costs of lost production, reconstructive surgery and hospitalisation were higher for on-demand, they did not balance out the higher costs of factor-concentrate consumption in prophylaxis. The cut-off risk of premature death, where on-demand and prophylaxis would have been equally costly, was 3.7 percentage units higher for on-demand than for prophylaxis. Such a great risk difference has not been reported elsewhere to our knowledge. Estimated cost-elasticities indicated that annual costs of prophylaxis would increase by approximately the same proportion as a potential increase in the price of factor concentrate and decrease less than proportionately with a reduction in prescribed dose kg-1. For on-demand, the annual costs would increase by approximately the same proportion as an increase in the prescribed dose kg-1. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Haemophilia
volume
10
issue
5
pages
515 - 526
publisher
Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
external identifiers
  • wos:000223758600015
  • pmid:15357779
  • scopus:4844222412
ISSN
1351-8216
DOI
10.1111/j.1365-2516.2004.00952.x
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
084c49be-65a2-4880-b879-33f5c36595ef (old id 127487)
date added to LUP
2007-07-12 11:43:42
date last changed
2017-10-22 03:35:51
@article{084c49be-65a2-4880-b879-33f5c36595ef,
  abstract     = {The expected annual cost (in the year 2000 prices) for a 30-year-old patient with average individual and treatment characteristics for on-demand EUR 51 832 (95% CI: 44 324-59 341) and for prophylaxis EUR 146 118 (95% CI: 129 965-162 271), was obtained from panel-data analysis of an 11-year retrospective panel of 156 patients with severe haemophilia in Norway and Sweden. Costs included haemophilia-related treatment costs within the health-care sector (factor concentrate, doctors' visits, diagnostic procedures, hospitalisation, invasive procedures, etc.) and cost for haemophilia-related resource use in other sectors (lost production, use of special equipment, adaptation of workplace and domicile, etc). Although costs of lost production, reconstructive surgery and hospitalisation were higher for on-demand, they did not balance out the higher costs of factor-concentrate consumption in prophylaxis. The cut-off risk of premature death, where on-demand and prophylaxis would have been equally costly, was 3.7 percentage units higher for on-demand than for prophylaxis. Such a great risk difference has not been reported elsewhere to our knowledge. Estimated cost-elasticities indicated that annual costs of prophylaxis would increase by approximately the same proportion as a potential increase in the price of factor concentrate and decrease less than proportionately with a reduction in prescribed dose kg-1. For on-demand, the annual costs would increase by approximately the same proportion as an increase in the prescribed dose kg-1.},
  author       = {Steen Carlsson, Katarina and Höjgård, Sören and Lindgren, Anna and Lethagen, Stefan and Schulman, S. and Glomstein, A. and Tengborn, Lilian and Berntorp, Erik and Lindgren, Björn},
  issn         = {1351-8216},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {5},
  pages        = {515--526},
  publisher    = {Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd},
  series       = {Haemophilia},
  title        = {Costs of on-demand and prophylactic treatment for severe haemophilia in Norway and Sweden.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2516.2004.00952.x},
  volume       = {10},
  year         = {2004},
}