Sullivan Patrick W, Follin Sheryl L, Nichol Michael B
Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research Program, University of Colorado School of Pharmacy, Denver, Colorado 80262, USA.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2004;22(14):929-42. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200422140-00003.
The majority of individuals with allergic rhinitis in the US take first-generation antihistamines (FGAs). Although FGAs have been proven effective in alleviating allergic rhinitis symptoms, they have been associated with an increased risk of motor vehicle, aviation and occupational injuries and deaths, reduced productivity and impaired learning.
The objective of this analysis was to quantify the total costs and benefits of FGA use in the US from the societal perspective.
We used a decision-analytic model to quantify the annual societal costs and benefits of treatment with FGAs compared with the hypothetical alternative of no treatment for the population of individuals with allergic rhinitis and taking FGAs in the US in 2001. The benefit associated with FGA use was estimated using the willingness-to-pay framework and projected to the US population using published estimates of the prevalence of allergic rhinitis. The costs of FGA-associated sedation included lost productivity and the direct and indirect cost of unintentional injuries (including motor vehicle, occupational, public and home injuries and fatalities). The incidence of injuries and fatalities associated with FGA use was estimated using the risk of injury attributable to the sedentary effects of FGAs in the allergic rhinitis population. To evaluate uncertainty in the model assumptions, a probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted using Bayesian second-order Monte Carlo simulation. Costs and benefits are expressed in 2001 US dollars, using a 3% discount rate.
Based on current utilisation, the total societal benefit (95% credible interval) associated with the use of FGAs for the treatment of allergic rhinitis was US 7.7 billion dollars (US 1.3 billion dollars to US 21 billion dollars). The societal cost of purchasing FGAs was only US 697 million dollars. However, the societal cost of FGA-associated sedation was US 11.3 billion dollars (US 2.4 billion dollars to US 50.8 billion dollars). The annual societal net benefit of FGA use for the treatment of allergic rhinitis in the US was -US4.2 billion dollars (-US 36 billion dollars to +US 0.296 billion dollars). The net benefit was negative in 97% of the 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations.
The societal benefits of FGA use in alleviating the symptoms of allergic rhinitis are significant. However, based on the assumptions, probability distributions and parameter estimate ranges used in the current model, it is very likely that the costs associated with sedation exceed the benefits of FGA use in the US. The cost of FGA-associated sedation is comparable to estimates of the cost of all medical care expenditures on respiratory conditions in the US (US 12.1 billion dollars to US 31.3 billion dollars) [1996 values] and provides compelling evidence of the economic burden of sedation associated with FGA use.
在美国,大多数过敏性鼻炎患者使用第一代抗组胺药(FGAs)。尽管FGAs已被证明能有效缓解过敏性鼻炎症状,但它们与机动车、航空及职业伤害和死亡风险增加、生产力下降及学习能力受损有关。
本分析的目的是从社会角度量化美国使用FGAs的总成本和效益。
我们使用一个决策分析模型,量化2001年美国过敏性鼻炎患者且正在使用FGAs的人群中,使用FGAs治疗与假设不治疗相比的年度社会成本和效益。使用支付意愿框架估算与使用FGAs相关的效益,并根据已发表的过敏性鼻炎患病率估算值推算至美国人群。与FGAs相关的镇静成本包括生产力损失以及意外伤害(包括机动车、职业、公共和家庭伤害及死亡)的直接和间接成本。使用FGAs在过敏性鼻炎人群中因久坐效应导致的伤害风险来估算与FGAs使用相关的伤害和死亡发生率。为评估模型假设中的不确定性,使用贝叶斯二阶蒙特卡洛模拟进行概率敏感性分析。成本和效益以2001年美元表示,采用3%的贴现率。
基于当前的使用情况,使用FGAs治疗过敏性鼻炎的社会总效益(95%可信区间)为77亿美元(13亿美元至210亿美元)。购买FGAs的社会成本仅为6.97亿美元。然而,与FGAs相关的镇静社会成本为113亿美元(24亿美元至508亿美元)。美国使用FGAs治疗过敏性鼻炎的年度社会净效益为 -42亿美元(-360亿美元至 +2.96亿美元)。在10000次蒙特卡洛模拟中,97%的净效益为负。
使用FGAs缓解过敏性鼻炎症状的社会效益显著。然而,基于当前模型中使用的假设、概率分布和参数估计范围,在美国,与镇静相关的成本很可能超过使用FGAs的效益。与FGAs相关的镇静成本与美国所有呼吸系统疾病医疗保健支出成本估算值(121亿美元至313亿美元)[1996年数值]相当,有力证明了与使用FGAs相关的镇静经济负担。