Primary Care Respiratory Journal Primary Care Respiratory Group UK International Primary Care Respiratory Group Primary Care Respiratory Group UK International Primary Care Respiratory Group
Home
About the PCRJ
Articles in Press
Current Issue
All Issues
Translations
Alerts
Most popular articles
Editorial Board
Advertising
Search Tools
Disclaimer and Legal Notices

Volume 19 Issue 1 March 2010

Original Research

Economic analyses comparing tiotropium with ipratropium or salmeterol in UK patients with COPD

Pages 68-74
*Ray Gania, Jane Griffina, Steve Kellyb, Maureen Rutten-van Mölkenc

a Market Access, Pricing and Outcomes Research, Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd, Berkshire, UK

b Outcomes Research & Evidence Based Medicine, Pfizer UK Ltd, Walton Oaks, UK

c Erasmus Medical Centre, Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Received 6 October 2009 • Accepted 27 December 2009 • Online 21 January 2010


Abstract
AIMS: This study presents a cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis comparing cost and outcomes for UK patients with COPD treated with either tiotropium, ipratropium or salmeterol. METHODS: A previously-published COPD cost-effectiveness model was adapted for the UK, then used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of tiotropium compared to salmeterol and ipratropium. Additional epidemiological data were used to estimate the budget impact of switching patients from ipratropium or salmeterol to tiotropium. RESULTS: In England, the estimated annual cost per patient on tiotropium was £1350, on salmeterol was £1404, and on ipratropium was £1427; in Scotland/Wales/Northern Ireland (S/W/NI) these costs were £1439, £1565, and £1631, respectively. Tiotropium patients experienced better quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) across all comparisons, and this option was therefore dominant compared to salmeterol and ipratropium. The probability of tiotropium being dominant ranged from 72% to 87% across comparisons. At a willingnessto- pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY, tiotropium had at least a 97% chance of being cost-effective. The estimated annual saving per primary care trust (PCT) of switching patients from salmeterol and ipratropium to tiotropium in England was £230,000 and in S/W/NI was £160,000. CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium is a cost-effective alternative to ipratropium and salmeterol, and switching COPD patients from ipratropium and salmeterol to tiotropium could result in considerable cost savings for PCTs along with improvements in quality-of-life.

Keywords
COPD, economic, budget impact, cost-effectiveness, tiotropium, salmeterol, ipratropium

* Corresponding author. Ray Gani Tel: +44 (0)1344 741 139 Fax: +44 (0)1344 742 701 Email: ray.gani@boehringer-ingelheim.com
PDF View full text as PDF document

CrossRef Right click on this DOI link and copy link/shortcut to cite this article (What is a DOI link?)

Export Export to bibliographic software or plain text

CiteULike Post to CiteULike

Email this article Email this article to friend/s or colleague/s

Website developed and maintained by danzigdesigns.com