 |
|
Cost and Quality Effects of Alternative Treatments for Persistent Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease
Alan L. Hillman, MD, MBA;
Bernard S. Bloom, PhD;
A. Mark Fendrick, MD;
J. Sanford Schwartz, MD
Arch Intern Med. 1992;152(7):1467-1472.
Abstract
| |
Background.—
Gastroesophageal reflux disease is commonly encountered by general internists and gastroenterologists.
Methods.—
We used decision analysis to assess the clinical and economic effects of three treatments—phase 1 therapy alone or combined with omeprazole or ranitidine hydrochloride therapy—for patients with persistent, symptomatic grade 2 or higher gastroesophageal reflux disease. To the maximum extent possible, data were obtained from the published literature. We convened an expert consensus panel to estimate specific data points when they were unavailable or contradictory in the literature, including estimates of optimal and actual clinical practice patterns. A 7-month model was used to correspond to the time frame of available clinical trial data. The perspective of the analysis was that of the payer. The costs of medical care for various clinical outcomes were based on actual mean payments made by Independence Blue Cross of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania Blue Shield.
Results.—
Although the retail payments for daily omeprazole therapy are the highest among the three interventions tested, it produced both the lowest expected overall payments for medical care and the most effective strategy for treating symptoms during the 7-month model. Omeprazole therapy was consistently approximately $1800 less costly than ranitidine therapy and $2700 less costly than phase 1 therapy alone during the period examined, regardless of whether empiric or nonempiric treatment strategies were used. Even when payments for major complications (the most important cost variable) were reduced by 80%, omeprazole therapy resulted in payments 17% and 22% lower than those associated with ranitidine therapy and phase 1 therapy alone, respectively. Omeprazole also produced the most symptom-free months during the 7-month follow-up period. The clinical and economic outcomes of performing an initial diagnostic workup, compared with treating patients empirically, were equal.
Conclusions.
We conclude that omeprazole therapy is the preferred initial therapeutic approach for patients with persistent, symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease in whom phase 1 therapy fails. Assessment of long-term approaches must await the results of extended clinical studies.
(Arch Intern Med. 1992;152:1467-1472)
Author Affiliations
From the General Internal Medicine Division (Drs Hillman, Bloom, Fendrick, and Schwartz), the Wharton School (Drs Hillman, Bloom, and Schwartz), and the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics (Drs Hillman, Bloom, Fendrick, and Schwartz), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Footnotes
Accepted for publication January 8, 1992.
Reprint requests to the Center for Health Policy, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, 3641 Locust Walk, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6218 (Dr Hillman).
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
Effectiveness and Costs of Omeprazole vs Ranitidine for Treatment of Symptomatic Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease in Primary Care Clinics in West Virginia
Kaplan-Machlis et al.
Arch Fam Med 2000;9:624-630.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Should Noncardiac Chest Pain Be Treated Empirically?: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis
Borzecki et al.
Arch Intern Med 2000;160:844-852.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Cost effectiveness of treatment for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in clinical practice: a clinical database analysis
Eggleston et al.
Gut 1998;42:13-16.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Diagnosis and Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease in a Managed Care Environment: Suggested Disease Management Guidelines
Fennerty et al.
Arch Intern Med 1996;156:477-484.
ABSTRACT
Acid-Reflux Disorders
Pope
NEJM 1994;331:656-660.
FULL TEXT
|
