...
首页> 外文期刊>The American Journal of Cardiology >Cost-Effectiveness of Dabigatran (150 mg Twice Daily) and Warfarin in Patients >= 65 Years With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation
【24h】

Cost-Effectiveness of Dabigatran (150 mg Twice Daily) and Warfarin in Patients >= 65 Years With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation

机译:达比加群(每天两次150毫克)和华法林对≥65岁非瓣膜性心房颤动的患者的成本效果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Dabigatran has been shown to be superior to warfarin for stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) but with higher out-of-pocket costs for patients. Although dabigatran has been shown to be cost effective from a societal perspective, cost implications for individual patients and insurers are not well described. We aimed to assess cost perspectives of each payer (Medicare and patient) in relation to administration, monitoring, and adverse outcomes for dabigatran and warfarin in patients with and without prescription drug coverage. Using a Markov model, we performed a decision analysis comparing 2 treatment strategies (dose-adjusted warfarin and dabigatran 150 mg twice daily) in patients 65 years old with NVAF, CHADS(2) scores >= 1, and Medicare insurance. Patients have a quality-adjusted life expectancy of 8.998 quality-adjusted life years with warfarin and 9.39 quality-adjusted life years with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily. From Medicare's perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing dabigatran with warfarin was $35,311 for patients with Part D coverage and cost saving for patients without coverage. From the patient's perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing dabigatran with warfarin was cost saving for patients with Part D coverage and $63,884 for those without coverage. In patients 65 years with NVAF and prescription insurance coverage, dabigatran 150 mg twice daily is both cost effective (Medicare's perspective) and cost saving (patient perspective) compared with warfarin, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000. However, patients without prescription drug coverage have a high out-of-pocket cost burden with dabigatran therapy, leading to a reduction in its cost-effectiveness compared with warfarin therapy. In conclusion, this Markov model suggests that Medicare Part D coverage influences the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran 150 mg daily compared with dose-adjusted warfarin from multiple payer perspectives. Published by Elsevier Inc.
机译:在非瓣膜性心房颤动(NVAF)中,达比加群在预防中风方面优于华法林,但患者的自付费用更高。尽管从社会的角度证明达比加群具有成本效益,但对个体患者和保险公司的成本影响却没有得到很好的描述。我们旨在评估每位付款人(医疗保险和患者)在达巴加群和华法林在有或没有处方药承保范围内的患者的管理,监测以及不良后果方面的成本前景。使用马尔可夫模型,我们对65岁NVAF,CHADS(2)得分> = 1和Medicare保险的患者进行了比较2种治疗策略(剂量调整的华法林和达比加群150 mg每天两次)的决策分析。使用华法令的患者的质量调整寿命为8.998质量调整的生命年,使用达比加群150 mg每日两次,患者的质量调整的预期寿命为9.39。从Medicare的角度来看,D部分保险患者将达比加群与华法林相比的成本效益比增加了35,311美元,而无保险患者则节省了成本。从患者的角度来看,比较达比加群和华法林的成本效益比对具有D部分保险的患者节省了成本,为没有保险的患者节省了$ 63,884。在具有NVAF和处方保险的65岁患者中,与华法林相比,达比加群150毫克/天两次(每日两次)既具有成本效益(Medicare的观点)又具有成本节约(患者的观点),愿意支付的门槛为100,000美元。然而,达比加群疗法无处方药覆盖的患者自付费用较高,与华法林疗法相比,其成本效益降低。总之,从多个付款人的角度来看,与剂量调整后的华法林相比,该马尔可夫模型表明,Medicare D部分的承保范围影响了达比加群150 mg / d的成本效益。由Elsevier Inc.发布

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号