Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
PharmacoEconomics
Published in: PharmacoEconomics 9/2005

01-09-2005 | Original Research Article

Cost effectiveness of dalteparin for preventing venous thromboembolism in abdominal surgery

Authors: Adrienne Heerey, Dr Sanjeev Suri

Published in: PharmacoEconomics | Issue 9/2005

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction: Patients undergoing abdominal surgeries face substantial risk of experiencing venous thromboembolic events in the perioperative period. The low-molecular-weight heparin dalteparin sodium is clinically effective in reducing the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in these patients. Dalteparin may be used in low (2500 units [U]) and high (5000U) once-daily doses for this indication. However, the cost effectiveness of dalteparin 5000U compared with dalteparin 2500U and unfractionated heparin (UFH) for this indication has not been studied.
Objective: To conduct a cost-utility analysis to evaluate the cost effectiveness of dalteparin compared with UFH for preventing VTE in patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery.
Methods: A Markov model, from a healthcare perspective, was constructed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of dalteparin 5000U and dalteparin 2500U compared with UFH. A 69-year-old mixed sex patient population was studied using pooled probabilities of clinical outcomes from randomised, controlled trials. Cost data were mostly derived from Medicare reimbursement, in year 2002–03 values. Cost effectiveness was measured as cost per QALY gained over the patient’s lifetime.
Results: Total costs for patients given UFH, dalteparin 2500U and dalteparin 5000U were $US45 855, $US45 882 and $US46 308, respectively, while QALYs were 9.5603, 9.5632 and 9.5811, respectively. Hence, the incremental cost effectiveness of dalteparin 5000U over dalteparin 2500U and UFH was $US23 799/QALY and $US21 779/QALY gained, respectively. Similarly, cost effectiveness for dalteparin 2500U over UFH was $US9310/QALY gained. Univariate sensitivity analysis showed that dalteparin 5000U maintained its cost effectiveness (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] <$US50 000/QALY gained) over the other two regimens for a wide range of cost and effectiveness estimates. Acceptability curves based on the results of Monte Carlo simulation (50 000 patients) showed that dalteparin 5000U would achieve cost effectiveness for 90% of patients at values close to $US230 000/QALY. Dalteparin 2500U was less effective than UFH for patients aged <63 years.
Conclusion: Even though our base-case analysis seems to show that dalteparin 5000U is cost effective compared with dalteparin 2500U and UFH for prophylaxis of VTE in patients undergoing abdominal surgery, Monte Carlo simulation demonstrated that this was the case for only about 50% of the patients if the threshold for cost effectiveness is set at $US50 000 per QALY gained. Furthermore, there was substantial uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness results. To ensure that ≥90% patients receive the benefit of the medication, policy makers would need to commit substantially more resources than suggested by the baseline ICERs.
Literature
1.
Mismetti P, Laporte S, Darmon JY, et al. Meta-analysis of low molecular weight heparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in general surgery. Br J Surg 2001; 88: 913–30PubMedCrossRef
2.
Clagett GP, Anderson Jr FA, Heit J, et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism. Chest 1995; 108: 312S–34SPubMedCrossRef
3.
Kakkar VV, Cohen AT, Edmonson RA, et al. Low molecular weight versus standard heparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after major abdominal surgery. The Thromboprophylaxis Collaborative Group. Lancet 1993; 341: 259–65PubMedCrossRef
4.
Bergqvist D, Burmark US, Flordal PA, et al. Low molecular weight heparin started before surgery as prophylaxis against deep vein thrombosis: 2500 versus 5000 XaI units in 2070 patients. Br J Surg 1995; 82: 496–501PubMedCrossRef
5.
Bergqvist D, Matzsch T, Burmark U, et al. Low molecular weight heparin given the evening before surgery compared with conventional dose heparin in prevention of thrombosis. Br J Surg 1988; 75: 888–91PubMedCrossRef
6.
Mamdani MM, Weingarten CM, Stevenson JG. Thromboembolic prophylaxis in moderate-risk patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery: decision and cost-effectiveness analyses. Pharmacotherapy 1996; 16: 1111–27PubMed
7.
Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, et al. Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA 1996; 276: 1253–8PubMedCrossRef
8.
Briggs A, Sculpher M. An introduction to Markov modelling for economic evaluation. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13: 397–409PubMedCrossRef
9.
TreeAge Software Inc. [online]. Available from URL: http:// www.treeage.com [Accessed 2005 Jul 23]
10.
Physician Desk Reference. Montvale (NJ): Thomson, 2002
11.
Bergqvist D, Jendteg S, Johansen L, et al. Cost of long-term complications of deep venous thrombosis of the lower extremities: an analysis of a defined patient population in Sweden. Ann Intern Med 1997; 126: 454–7PubMed
12.
Hartl P, Brucke P, Dienstl E, et al. Prophylaxis of thromboemholism in general surgery: comparison between standard heparin and fragmin. Thromb Res 1990; 57: 577–84PubMedCrossRef
13.
Caen JP. A randomized double-blind study between a low molecular weight heparin Kabi 2165 and standard heparin in the prevention of deep vein thrombosis in general surgery: a French multicenter trial. Thromb Haemost 1988; 59: 216–20PubMed
14.
Koller M, Schoch U, Buchmann P, et al. Low molecular weight heparin (Kabi 2165) as thromboprophylaxis in elective visceral surgery: a randomized, double-blind study versus unfractionated heparin. Thromb Haemost 1986; 56: 243–6PubMed
15.
Gould MK, Dembitzer AD, Doyle RL, et al. Low-molecularweight heparins compared with unfractionated heparin for treatment of acute deep venous thrombosis: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Ann Intern Med 1999; 130: 800–9PubMed
16.
White RH, Beyth RJ, Zhou H, et al. Major bleeding after hospitalization for deep-venous thrombosis. Am J Med 1999; 107: 414–24PubMedCrossRef
17.
Prandoni P, Lensing AW, Cogo A, et al. The long-term clinical course of acute deep venous thrombosis. Ann Intern Med 1996; 125: 1–7PubMed
18.
Hansson PO, Sorbo J, Eriksson H. Recurrent venous thromboembolism after deep vein thrombosis: incidence and risk factors. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160: 769–74PubMedCrossRef
19.
National Center for Health Statistics. Abridged US Life Tables: US Department of Health and Human Services, 2001
20.
Lenert LA, Soetikno RM. Automated computer interviews to elicit utilities: potential applications in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1997; 4: 49–56PubMedCrossRef
21.
Fryback DG, Dasbach EJ, Klein R, et al. The Beaver Dam Health Outcomes Study: initial catalog of health-state quality factors. Med Decis Making 1993; 13: 89–102PubMedCrossRef
22.
HCIA Inc. Length of stay by diagnosis, United States [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​ems.​hhs.​gov/​statistics/​ medpar/ [Accessed 2005 Jul 22]
23.
Drug Topics Red Book. Montvale (NJ): Thomson, 2003
24.
US Department of Health and Human Services. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Available from URL: http:// www.ems.hhs.gov/statistics/medpar/ [Accessed 2005 Jul 22]
25.
American Medical Association. Physician’s current procedural terminology. Chicago (IL): AMA Press, 2002
26.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer expenditure survey: US Department of Labor, 2002 [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​bls.​gov [Accessed 2005 Jul 22]
27.
Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, et al. Cost effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996
28.
Briggs AH. Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models. Pharmacoeconomics 2000; 17: 479–500PubMedCrossRef
29.
Bergqvist D, Matzsch T, Burmark U, et al. Low molecular weight heparin given the evening before surgery compared with conventional dose heparin in prevention of thrombosis. Br J Surg 1998; 75: 888–91CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Cost effectiveness of dalteparin for preventing venous thromboembolism in abdominal surgery
Authors
Adrienne Heerey
Dr Sanjeev Suri
Publication date
01-09-2005
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
PharmacoEconomics / Issue 9/2005
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200523090-00005

Other articles of this Issue 9/2005

PharmacoEconomics 9/2005 Go to the issue

Book Review

The public financing of pharmaceuticals: An economic approach

Adis Drug Evaluation

Linezolid

Review Article

Economic implications of biological therapies for Crohn’s disease

Review Article

A systematic review of patient-reported outcome instruments measuring sleep dysfunction in adults

Review Article

The role of economic evaluation in vaccine decision making

Original Research Article

Cost-benefit analysis of vaccination against tick-borne encephalitis among French troops