Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics 1/2006

01-03-2006 | Original Papers

Cost-utility analysis comparing meropenem with imipenem plus cilastatin in the treatment of severe infections in intensive care

Authors: Steven J. Edwards, Helen E. Campbell, Jonathan M. Plumb

Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics | Issue 1/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

This study compared the cost-effectiveness of meropenem with that of imipenem plus cilastatin in the treatment of severe infections in hospital intensive care in the UK. A Markov model was constructed to model lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of using meropenem and imipenem plus cilastatin for the treatment of severe infections in intensive care. Estimates of effectiveness, utility weights and costs were obtained from the published literature. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the robustness of the results. Estimated treatment costs for the patient cohort were £14,938 with meropenem and £15,585 with imipenem plus cilastatin. QALYs gained were 7,495 with meropenem and 7,413 with imipenem plus cilastatin. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed meropenem to be significantly less costly (−£636.47, 95% CI −£132.33 to–£1,140.62) and more effective (0.084, 95% CI 0.023 to 0.144). Meropenem thus appears significantly more effective and less expensive than imipenem plus cilastatin and should therefore be considered the dominant treatment strategy.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Edwards SJ, Emmas CE, Campbell HE (2005) Systematic review comparing meropenem with imipenem plus cilastatin in the treatment of severe infections. Curr Med Res Opin 21:785–794CrossRefPubMed Edwards SJ, Emmas CE, Campbell HE (2005) Systematic review comparing meropenem with imipenem plus cilastatin in the treatment of severe infections. Curr Med Res Opin 21:785–794CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Wright JC, Plenderleith L, Ridley SA (2000) Long-term survival following intensive care: subgroup analysis and comparison with the general population. Anaesthesia 58:637–642CrossRef Wright JC, Plenderleith L, Ridley SA (2000) Long-term survival following intensive care: subgroup analysis and comparison with the general population. Anaesthesia 58:637–642CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Garau J, Blanquer J, Cobo L, Corcia S, Daguerre M, de Latorre FJ, Leon C, Del Nogal F, Net A, Rello J (1997) Prospective, randomised, multicentre study of meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin as empiric monotherapy in severe nosocomial infections. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 16:789–796CrossRefPubMed Garau J, Blanquer J, Cobo L, Corcia S, Daguerre M, de Latorre FJ, Leon C, Del Nogal F, Net A, Rello J (1997) Prospective, randomised, multicentre study of meropenem versus imipenem/cilastatin as empiric monotherapy in severe nosocomial infections. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 16:789–796CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Rosenberg AL, Watts C (2000) Patients readmitted to ICUs: a systematic review of risk factors and outcomes. Chest 118:492–502CrossRefPubMed Rosenberg AL, Watts C (2000) Patients readmitted to ICUs: a systematic review of risk factors and outcomes. Chest 118:492–502CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Anonymous (1999) National statistics. Mortality statistics: England and Wales 1999. TSO: London Anonymous (1999) National statistics. Mortality statistics: England and Wales 1999. TSO: London
6.
go back to reference Anonymous (2004) National statistics. Annual abstract of statistics 2004. TSO: London Anonymous (2004) National statistics. Annual abstract of statistics 2004. TSO: London
8.
go back to reference Anonymous (2003) British national formulary. British Medical Association and Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain: London Anonymous (2003) British national formulary. British Medical Association and Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain: London
9.
go back to reference Kerridge RK, Glasziou PP, Hillman KM (1995) The use of “quality-adjusted life years” (QALYs) to evaluate treatment in intensive care. Anaesth Intensive Care 23:322–331PubMed Kerridge RK, Glasziou PP, Hillman KM (1995) The use of “quality-adjusted life years” (QALYs) to evaluate treatment in intensive care. Anaesth Intensive Care 23:322–331PubMed
11.
go back to reference Briggs AH, Goeree R, Blackhouse G, O’Brien BJ (2002) Probabilistic analysis of cost-effectiveness models: choosing between treatment strategies for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Med Decis Making 22:290–308CrossRefPubMed Briggs AH, Goeree R, Blackhouse G, O’Brien BJ (2002) Probabilistic analysis of cost-effectiveness models: choosing between treatment strategies for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Med Decis Making 22:290–308CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Rawlins MD, Culyer AJ (2004) National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments. BMJ 329:224–227CrossRefPubMed Rawlins MD, Culyer AJ (2004) National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments. BMJ 329:224–227CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Smyth ETM, Barr JG, Hogg GM (1996) An assessment of hidden costs on total prescribing costs of courses of meropenem and imipenem/cilastatin. Br J Med Econ 10:325–340 Smyth ETM, Barr JG, Hogg GM (1996) An assessment of hidden costs on total prescribing costs of courses of meropenem and imipenem/cilastatin. Br J Med Econ 10:325–340
14.
go back to reference Plumridge RJ (1997) Cost analysis of infusion versus injection delivery of imipenem/cilastatin and meropenem. Clin Drug Invest 14:132–136 Plumridge RJ (1997) Cost analysis of infusion versus injection delivery of imipenem/cilastatin and meropenem. Clin Drug Invest 14:132–136
15.
go back to reference Attanasio E, Russo P, Carunchio G, Basoli A, Caprino L (2000) Cost-effectiveness study of imipenem/cilastatin versus meropenem in intra-abdominal infections. Dig Surg 17:164–172CrossRefPubMed Attanasio E, Russo P, Carunchio G, Basoli A, Caprino L (2000) Cost-effectiveness study of imipenem/cilastatin versus meropenem in intra-abdominal infections. Dig Surg 17:164–172CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Basoli A, Meli EZ, Mazzocchi P, Speranza V (1997) Imipenem/cilastatin (1.5 mg daily) versus meropenem (3 g daily) in patients with intra-abdominal infections: results of a prospective, randomised, multicentre trial. Scand J Infect Dis 29:503–508PubMed Basoli A, Meli EZ, Mazzocchi P, Speranza V (1997) Imipenem/cilastatin (1.5 mg daily) versus meropenem (3 g daily) in patients with intra-abdominal infections: results of a prospective, randomised, multicentre trial. Scand J Infect Dis 29:503–508PubMed
Metadata
Title
Cost-utility analysis comparing meropenem with imipenem plus cilastatin in the treatment of severe infections in intensive care
Authors
Steven J. Edwards
Helen E. Campbell
Jonathan M. Plumb
Publication date
01-03-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
The European Journal of Health Economics / Issue 1/2006
Print ISSN: 1618-7598
Electronic ISSN: 1618-7601
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-005-0333-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2006

The European Journal of Health Economics 1/2006 Go to the issue

Scentific information

Thank you to the referees 2005

Pricing and Reimbursement Systems in Europe

Off-patent drugs in Italy