Author/Editor		Lloyd, AC; Šorli, Jurij; Cencelj, Simona
Title		Primerjava stroškov in učinkovitosti inhaliranega flutikazonpropionata in budezionida za zdravljenje astme pri odraslih in otrocih
Translated title		The cost effectiveness of inhalited fluticasone propionate and budesonide in the treatment of asthma in adults and children
Type		članek
Source		Zdrav Vestn
Vol. and No.		Letnik 68, št. 12
Publication year		1999
Volume		str. 737-41
Language		slo
Abstract		Background. This study compared the costs and effectiveness of fluticasone propionate (FP) and budesonide (BUD) in the treatment af asthma in Slovenia. The population was mixture of adults and children with asthma of varying severity included in a recently published meta-analysis. Results. Patients treated with FP were, on average, successfully controlled for 41.7% of treated weeks compared with 34.1% in the BUD group (p<0.001). The FP group also showed significantly greater improvements symptom-free days, symptom-free 24 hour periods and episode free days. The overall mean weekly cost per patients was 3077 SIT for patieents treated with BUD and 1916 SIT for patients treated with FP. The purcase price of FP was similar to that of BUD (1524 SIT vs. 1462 SIT per week), but the costs of health care contacts were lower in the FP group (56 SIT vs. 1275 SIT per week). When all asthma-related health care costs were taken into account, the FP group had lower average costs than the BUD group. The total expenditure per week of successful treatment was 4594 for patients treated with FP and 9025 SIT for patients treated with BUD. FP was more cost-effective than BUD for all effectiveness endpoints assessed. Conclusion. FP would reduce costs at least at the same effectiveness compared to BUD.
Summary		Izhodišča. V tej raziskavi smo primerjali stroške in učinkovitost flutikazonpropoinata (FP) in budezonida (BUD) za zdravljenje astme v Sloveniji. Osnova za izračun so bili podatki nedavno objavljene metaanalize sedmih raziskav, v katere so bili vključeni odrasli in otroci z astmo različnih težavnostnih stopenj. Rezultati. Bolnniki v teh raziskavah, ki so jih zdravili s FP, so astmo uspešno obvladvali 41,7% dni opazovalnega obdobja zdravljenja, v primerjavi s 34,1% pri skupini, ki je jemala BUD (p<0,001). Pri skupini, ki je jemala FP, se je pokazalo tudi povečanje števila 12-urnih obdobij in 24-urnih obdobij brez simptomov bolezni ter števila dni, ko bolniki niso imeli nikakršnih nevšečnosti z boleznijo. Splošni povprečni tedenski stroški na posameznika bi v Sloveniji pri bolnikih, ki bi jemali BUD, znašali 3077 SIT, pri tistih, ki bi jemali FP, pa 1916 SIT. Nakupna cena FP je zelo podobna nakupni BUD (1524 SIT oziroma 1462 SIT tedensko), vendar pa bi bili stroški zdravstvenega varstva pri skupni FP nižji kot pri skupini BUD (56 SIT v primerjavi s 1275 SIT tedensko). Če bi upoštevali celotn estroške, povezane z zdravljenjem astme, bi imela skupina FP nižje povprečne stroške kot skupina BUD. Skupni tedenski izdatek za uspešno zdravljenje bi znašal pri bolnikih, ki bi jemali FP, 4594 SIT, pri bolnikih, ki bi jemali BUD, pa 9025 SIT.FP bi bil stroškovno bolj učinkovit kot BUD v vseh zaključkih o učinkovitosti, ki smo jih v tej raziskavi primerjali. Zaključek. FP bi v primerjavi z BUD znižal stroške ob vsaj enaki učinkovitosti zdravljenja.
Descriptors		ASTHMA ADRENAL CORTEX HORMONES DRUG COSTS COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS ADULT CHILD META-ANALYSIS