Search

A shortage of donor liver grafts unfortunately results in approximately 10% of patients dying whilst listed for a liver transplant in Europe and the United States. Thus it is imperative that all available organs are used as efficiently as possible. This paper reports upon the application of a simulation modelling approach to assess the impact of several alternative allocation policies upon the cost effectiveness of this technology at one liver transplant centre in the UK. The impact of changes in allocation criteria on the estimated net life expectancy, average net costs and overall cost effectiveness of the transplantation programme were evaluated. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the base case allocation policy, based upon the time spent on the waiting list (i.e., longest wait first) was 11,557 pounds sterling at 1999 prices. The ICERs associated with an allocation policy based upon age (lowest age first), and an allocation policy based upon the severity of the pre-transplant condition of the patient (with most severely ill patients given a lower priority) were lower than the base case at 10,424 pounds sterling and 9,077 pounds sterling, respectively. The results of this modelling study suggest that the overall cost effectiveness of the liver transplantation programme could be improved if the current allocation policy were modified to give more weight to the age of the patient and the reduced chances of success of the most severely ill patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Early intervention with budesonide is an effective strategy for mild persistent asthma, which has been shown to provide additional clinical benefits at a low incremental cost using USA cost data. The present authors analysed whether this strategy would be cost-effective using cost data for other countries. Based on the 3-yr prospective, randomised, double-blind inhaled Steroid Treatment As Regular Therapy (START) in early asthma study (comparing budesonide and placebo combined with usual asthma therapy), the cost-effectiveness was estimated separately for eight different countries, from both healthcare payer and societal perspectives, of adding budesonide to usual asthma therapy. Local unit costs were applied to data for the total trial population. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were estimated as cost per symptom-free day (SFD) gained. Budesonide increased SFDs by an average of 14.1 days annually. From a healthcare payer perspective, budesonide would reduce the total cost of asthma care in Australia. In Sweden, Canada, France, Spain, UK, China and the USA, the ICER ranged from US$2.4-11.3 per SFD. From a societal perspective, budesonide would be cost-saving in Australia, Canada and Sweden. In conclusion, for countries where costs with budesonide are higher, the policy implication has to be determined by that health system's willingness to pay for an additional symptom-free day. However, where budesonide therapy increases symptom-free days and reduces total costs, the policy conclusion clearly favours early intervention.