Search

Objective: Asthma educational interventions have been shown to improve several clinically and economically important outcomes. However, these interventions are costly in themselves and could lead to even higher disease costs. A cost-effectiveness threshold analysis would be helpful in determining the threshold value of the cost of educational interventions, leading to these interventions being cost-effective. The aim of the present study was to perform a cost-effectiveness threshold analysis to determine the level at which the cost of a pediatric asthma educational intervention would be cost-effective and cost-saving. Methods: A Markov-type model was developed in order to estimate costs and health outcomes of a simulated cohort of pediatric patients with persistent asthma treated over a 12-month period. Effectiveness parameters were obtained from a single uncontrolled before-and-after study performed with Colombian asthmatic children. Cost data were obtained from official databases provided by the Colombian Ministry of Health. The main outcome was the variable “quality-adjusted life-years” (QALYs). Results: A deterministic threshold sensitivity analysis showed that the asthma educational intervention will be cost-saving to the health system if its cost is under US$513.20. Additionally, the analysis showed that the cost of the intervention would have to be below US$967.40 in order to be cost-effective. Conclusions: This study identified the level at which the cost of a pediatric asthma educational intervention will be cost-effective and cost-saving for the health system in Colombia. Our findings could be a useful aid for decision makers in efficiently allocating limited resources when planning asthma educational interventions for pediatric patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Suboptimal adherence to inhaled corticosteroids (ICs) is an important cause of poor asthma control in pediatric patients. Among the factors that can be most easily changed for enhancing adherence to ICs is a reduction in the dosing frequency, from twice-daily dosing to once-daily dosing. However, no previous studies have reported an economic evaluation comparing once-daily versus twice-daily IC dosing for pediatric asthma. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of once-daily versus twice-daily IC dosing for maintenance treatment of asthma in pediatric patients.Methods: A Markov-type model was developed in order to estimate costs and health outcomes of a simulated cohort of pediatric patients with persistent asthma treated over a 12-month period. Effectiveness parameters were obtained from a systematic review of the literature. Cost data were obtained from official databases provided by the Colombian Ministry of Health. The main outcome was the variable “quality-adjusted life-years” (QALYs).Results: For the base-case analysis, the model showed that compared with twice-daily dosing, once-daily dosing strategy involved lower costs (US$1529.3 versus $1709.1 average cost per patient over 12 months) and the greatest gain in QALYs (0.8284 versus 0.8084 QALYs on average per patient over 12 months), resulting in once-daily dosing strategy being considered dominant.Conclusions: This study shows that compared with twice-daily dosing, once-daily IC dosing for treating pediatric patients with persistent asthma is the dominant strategy because it involves a greater gain in QALYs at lower total treatment cost. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Infants (0–1 years of age) and young children (1–3 years of age) are a unique subpopulation with regard to inhaled therapies. There are various anatomic, physiological, and emotional factors peculiar to this age group that present significant difficulties and challenges for aerosol delivery. Most studies of therapeutic aerosols that have been performed with patients of this age group, particularly recent studies with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), administered aerosols with relatively large particles (ie, >3 μm in mass median aerodynamic diameter). These drugs were designed for use in adults and older children and were administered with masks, which are frequently rejected by patients. Based on these studies, it was recently suggested that ICSs might not be as therapeutically effective in infants and young children as in adults. We review the reasons that large-particle corticosteroid aerosols are not likely to be effective in infants and young children. This patient population differs from adults in airway anatomy and physiology, as well as in behavior and adherence to therapy. We suggest that the benefit of ICSs in this age group requires further evaluation to determine whether better therapeutic outcomes might be achieved with smaller particles. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]