A cost-effectiveness analysis to illustrate the impact of cost definitions on results, interpretations and comparability of pharmacoeconomic studies in the US

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 27, Issue 9, 2009, Pages 735-744

  Tunis, Sandra L ^a  

^a IMS Consulting Services   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; HOSPITAL CHARGE; HOSPITAL DEPARTMENT; HOSPITAL PATIENT; HOSPITALIZATION; MONTE CARLO METHOD; OUTPATIENT CARE; PHARMACOECONOMICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; UNITED STATES;

CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; DIABETES COMPLICATIONS; DIABETES MELLITUS, TYPE 2; ECONOMICS, PHARMACEUTICAL; HUMANS; HYPOGLYCEMIC AGENTS; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC; UNITED STATES;

EID: 70349280599     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: 11792027     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/10899600-000000000-00000     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Menzin J, Boulanger L, Langley-Hawthorne C, et al. Potential short-term economic benefits of improved glycemic control. Diabetes Care 2001; 24: 24-51
2. Kantor J, Margolis DJ. Treatment options for diabetic neuropathic foot ulcers: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Dermatol Surg 2001; 27: 347-351
3. Brandle M, Zhou H, Smith BRK, et al. The direct medical cost of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2003; 26: 2300-2304
4. Maciejewski ML, Maynard C. Diabetes-related utilization and costs for inpatient and outpatient services in the Veterans Administration. Diabetes Care 2004; 27: 69-73
5. Drug Topics Redbook. Montvale (NJ): USA Thomson PDR, 2006
6. Gencarelli DM. Average wholesale price for prescription drugs: is there a more appropriate pricing mechanism? [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nhpf.org/library/details.cfm/2372 [Accessed 2009 Jun 12]
7. Technician training tutorial: billing for Rx drugs. Pharmacists' pharmacistsletter.com [Accessed 2009 Jun 12]
8. Clarke P, Gray A, Legood R, et al. The impact of diabetes-related complications on healthcare costs: results from the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS Study No. 65). Diabetes Med 2003; 20: 442-450
9. American Diabetes Association. Economic costs of diabetes in the US in 2007. Diabetes Care 2008; 31: 1-20
10. O'Brien medical costs of complications resulting from type 2 diabetes in the US. Diabetes Care 1998; 21: 1122-1128
11. O'Brien costs for microvascular and macrovascular complications resulting from type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United States in 2000. Clin Ther 2003; 25: 1017-1038
12. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Lammert M, et al. Comparing the long-term cost-effectiveness of repaglinide plus metformin versus nateglinide plus metformin in type 2 diabetes patients with inadequate glycaemic control: an application of the CORE diabetes model in type 2 diabetes. Curr Med Res Opin 2004; 20: S41-51
13. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, et al. The CORE diabetes model: projecting long term clinical outcomes, costs and cost-effectiveness of interventions in diabetes mellitus (types 1 and 2) to support clinical and reimbursement decision making. Curr Med Res Opin 2004; 20: S5-26
14. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, et al. Validation of the CORE diabetes model against epidemiological and clinical studies. Curr Med Res Opin 2004; 20: S27-40
15. Minshall ME, Oglesby AK, Wintle ME, et al. Estimating the long-term cost-effectiveness of exenatide in the United States: an adjunctive treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Value Health 2008; 11: 22-33
16. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of detemir-based basal/bolus therapy versus NPH-based basal bolus therapy for type 1 diabetes in a UK setting: an economic evaluation based on meta-analysis results of four clinical trials. Curr Med Res Opin 2004; 20: S1729-46
17. Tunis SL, Minshall ME. Self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes: cost-effectiveness in the United States. Am J Man Care 2008; 14: 131-140
18. Briggs AH, Wonderling DE, Mooney CZ. Pulling cost-effectiveness analysis up by its bootstraps: a non-parametric approach to confidence interval estimation. Health Econ 1997; 6: 327-340
19. Clarke P, Gray A, Holman R. Estimating utility values for health states of type 2 diabetic patients using the EQ-5D (UKPDS 62). Med Dec Making 2002; 22: 340-349
20. Tengs TO, Wallace A. One thousand health-related quality- JA, of-life estimates. Med Care 2000; 38: 583-637 Shomphe LA, Kavanagh PL, et al. Direct
21. Begg S, Vos T, Barker B, et al. The burden of disease and injury in Australia 2003. Canberra (ACT): Australian In- JA, stitute of Health and Welfare, 2007 [online]. Available from Patrick AR, Caro J. Estimates of direct medical URL: http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/index.cfm/title/10317 [Accessed 2009 Jun 12]
22. Carrington AL, Mawdsley SK, Morley M, et al. Psychological status of diabetic people with or without lower limb disability. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 1996; 32: 19-25
23. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Technology appraisal guidance on the use of long-acting insulin analogues [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ [Accessed 2009 Jun 12]
24. IMS pricing and reimbursement. 2007 Oct. (Data on file; available from author
25. Pelletier EM, Smith PJ, Boye KS, et al. Direct medical costs for type 2 diabetes mellitus complications in the US commercial payer setting: a resource for economic research. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2008; 6 (2-3): 103-112
26. Hart AC, Hopkins CA, Ford B, eds. ICD-9-CM for hospitals (vol 1, 2 & 3). 6th ed. Salt Lake City (UT): Ingenix, 2006
27. Beebe M, Dalton JA, Duffy C, et al. editors. Current procedural terminology (CPT) 2006. Professional edition. Chicago (IL): American Medical Association, 2005
28. ICD-9-CM official guidelines for coding and reporting, effective April 1, 2005 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/icd9/icdguide. pdf [Accessed 2009 Jun 12]