scholarly journals A Budget Impact Analysis of Iron Polymaltose and Ferric Carboxymaltose Infusions

Author(s):  
Chuin Khai Lim ◽  
Michael Connolly ◽  
Corinne Mirkazemi

Abstract Objective: To compare the direct costs of ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) infusions, and iron polymaltose (IPM) infused via either a slow or rapid infusion; and explore potential savings associated with increased uptake of the least-expensive option at a local hospital.Setting: Hospital staff responsible for manufacturing, administering, and monitoring iron infusions, and the patients that received them at the Royal Hobart Hospital in 2018. Method: Frequency analysis identified the most prescribed iron infusion doses. A time-motion methodology was used to calculate the direct costs for each protocol at these doses. Finally, a budget-impact analysis of encouraging increased use of the least-expensive infusion protocol was conducted. Main outcome measures: Total direct costs for each infusion protocol at common doses. Potential budget savings associated with switching to the lowest costing of these infusion protocols where possible.Results: The most common doses were 0.5g, 1g, 1.5g and 2g. At these dose points, FCM infusions are the least expensive, but only if national health subsidies are applied. In cases where they do not apply, IPM prepared from ampoules and infused using the rapid protocol (‘IPM Ampoules Rapid’) is the least expensive. Switching all applicable FCM infusions and IPM infusions administered using the slow infusion protocol to IPM Ampoules Rapid is projected to yield up to $12,000 worth of savings annually.Conclusions: Increased use of the IPM Ampoules Rapid protocol when government-subsidised options are not available is projected to have cost-saving outcomes. Investigation of implementation strategies to increase the use of this protocol are warranted.




2020 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. S568
Author(s):  
W. Padula ◽  
S. Malaviya ◽  
N. Reid ◽  
F. Chingcuanco ◽  
J. Ballreich ◽  
...  


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1612.2-1613
Author(s):  
J. M. Bello-Gualtero ◽  
O. J. Calixto ◽  
G. Salguedo ◽  
Y. M. Chamorro-Melo ◽  
C. A. Camargo Rodríguez ◽  
...  

Background:Spondyloarthritis refers to a family of diseases, of which ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis are responsible for axial impairment. Previously, the only treatment available were NSAIDs, which control activity and stop radiological progression, but at the expense of increased adverse effects, such as cardiovascular risk, dyspepsia and chronic renal failure. For the past 2 decades, biological therapy has been available, which means an increase in care costs.Objectives:The objective of this study is to perform a budget impact analysis of biologic therapy.Methods:To do a budget impact analysis from the perspective of the payer, comparing biological therapy with coventional therapy for the treatment of spondyloarthritis. Demographic characterization of the population attended at the Central Military Hospital. Time horizon from 2012 to 2018, taking the activity count according to the hospital’s billing and the prices of the activities of the state body SISMED. Exchange rates at the end of 2018.Results:The patients attended were 117, mostly men (63, 25%), average age 46, 4 years (SD 13), with disease diagnosis time of 9, 8 years (SD 9, 6). In the budget impact analysis, it is observed that 25% of patients were on DMARDs therapy, 22% with NSAIDs and 96% with biologic therapy. The average year/patient cost with NSAIDs alone would be EUR 381, with DMARDs only EUR 9,318 and, if only biological therapy was used, EUR 423. Within the total number of patients, the average annual cost, including the possibility of combining these drugs, amounted to EUR 5,403Conclusion:Including biological therapy in the care of patients with spondyloarthritis can increase up to 24 times the annual cost per patient. This increase is not only due to higher market value, it also relates to the need for more medical procedures and diagnostic follow-up tests.References:[1]Strömbeck, et al. Cost of Illness from the Public Payers’ Perspective in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis in Rheumatological Care. J Rheumatol 2010;37;2348-2355.Disclosure of Interests:None declared



2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laure Benjamin ◽  
Valérie Buthion ◽  
Michaël Iskedjian ◽  
Bechara Farah ◽  
Catherine Rioufol ◽  
...  


2021 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. S81
Author(s):  
O. Siskou ◽  
A. Koutsovasilis ◽  
J. Doupis ◽  
I. Karagkouni ◽  
O. Konstantakopoulou ◽  
...  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document