Direct medical costs of pediatric asthma exacerbations requiring hospital attendance in a middle-income country

Patterns of rescue and maintenance therapy claims surrounding a clinical encounter for an asthma exacerbation

BACKGROUND

A "window of opportunity" has been proposed where anti-inflammatory therapy administration in response to symptoms could prevent exacerbation.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate rescue and maintenance therapy claims surrounding a severe asthma exacerbation serious enough to require a face-to-face clinical encounter.

METHODS

Merative MarketScan research databases (US administrative claims 2011 to 2017) were analyzed for patients aged ≥4 years, with an asthma diagnosis code, who filled short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) and Global Initiative for Asthma Steps 3 to 5 maintenance therapies. Patients were indexed on a random SABA claim and had 12 months' continuous health plan eligibility pre- and post-index. Serious exacerbations were severe exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids prescribed from an outpatient clinic, urgent care or emergency department, or hospitalization for asthma. SABA and maintenance claims 30 days pre- and post-event were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 319,342 patients (30% children 4 to 11 years; 70% adults or adolescents ≥12 years), 27.2% of children and 16.8% of adolescents or adults experienced ≥ 1 serious exacerbation (unadjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.85 [95% confidence interval, 1.81-1.88]). In the 30 days pre-event, 42.6% filled ≥1 SABA (children: 44.3%; adolescents or adults: 41.5%; OR, 1.12 [1.09-1.16]) and 57.4% filled maintenance (children: 59.0%; adolescents or adults: 56.3%; OR, 1.12 [1.08-1.15]). In the 30 days post-event, 61.4% filled SABA (children: 69.7%; adolescents or adults: 55.6%; OR, 1.84 [1.78-1.90]) and 94.8% filled maintenance (children: 98.6%; adolescents or adults: 92.2%; OR, 6.09 [5.45-6.81]).

CONCLUSION

Many patients treated as having moderate-to-severe asthma escalate SABA claims before a serious exacerbation, but approximately 40% have no anti-inflammatory maintenance fill, highlighting a "window of opportunity" to prevent exacerbations using inhaled corticosteroids concomitantly with SABA as rescue.

Outcomes of a respiratory therapist driven high flow nasal cannula management protocol for pediatric critical asthma patients

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to determine if a respiratory therapist (RT)-driven high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) protocol could decrease duration of HFNC use, pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS), and duration of continuous albuterol use in pediatric patients with critical asthma.

METHODS

This was a quality improvement project performed at a quaternary academic PICU. Patients admitted to the PICU between 2 and 18 years of age with a diagnosis of asthma requiring continuous albuterol and HFNC were included. Implementation of an RT-driven HFNC protocol [Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) 1] occurred in October 2017. Additional interventions included weaning continuous albuterol and HFNC simultaneously (PDSA 2; March 2019), adjusting HFNC wean rate (PDSA 3; July 2020), and a HFNC holiday (PDSA 4; October 2021). HFNC duration was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included LOS data and continuous albuterol duration. Noninvasive ventilation (NIV), invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and 7-day PICU and hospital readmission rates were used as balancing measures.

RESULTS

A total of 410 patients were included. Patient demographics and adjunct therapy use did not differ among the groups. After PDSA 2, mean HFNC duration decreased (26.8-18.1 h). Mean PICU LOS decreased (41-31.8 h). Mean hospital LOS also decreased (86.5-68 h). These outcomes remained stable during PDSA 3 and 4. Continuous albuterol duration and NIV use were unchanged, while IMV use decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

An RT-driven HFNC protocol led to decreased length of HFNC and PICU and hospital LOS for pediatric patients with critical asthma without an increase in adverse events.

Comparison of three alternatives for the management of moderate asthma in children aged 6-11 years: a cost-utility analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent asthma guidelines for children 6-11 years with persistent asthma advocate three alternatives: SMART (budesonide/formoterol 80/4.5 mcg qd plus additional doses as needed), fixed combination of budesonide/formoterol, and fixed-dose budesonide. Concerns have arisen as to which of the proposed alternatives has the best possible cost-effectiveness profile. This study aimed to assess the health and economic consequences of SMART, fixed combination, and fixed-dose budesonide therapy in children 6-11 years old with persistent asthma.

METHODS

A probabilistic Markov model was created to estimate the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of patients with persistent asthma. Total costs and QALYs of SMART, fixed combination, and fixed-dose budesonide therapy were calculated over a time horizon of 6 years. Multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

The mean QALY per patient was 0.57 and 0.56 QALYs per patient per year of SMART and fixed combination and 0,52 with fixed-dose budesonide. The total mean of discounted costs per patient per cycle were US$111 for SMART, US$133 for fixed combination, and US$67 for fixed-dose budesonide. The net monetary benefit of SMART was US$12,549, US$12278 for fixed combination, and US$11,380 for fixed-dose budesonide.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that SMART was more cost-effective than fixed combination and fixed-dose budesonide. These findings complement and support the GINA 2021 and National Asthma Education and Prevention Program asthma guideline recommendations for use of inhaled corticosteroids-formoterol in children 6-11 years old with persistent asthma.

The Use of Bacterial Lysate for the Prevention of Wheezing Episodes in Preschool Children: A Cost-Utility Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although increasing recent evidence has shown the efficacy of bacterial lysate therapy for the prevention of wheezing episodes and asthma exacerbations in pediatric patients, evidence of its cost-effectiveness in preschool patients is scarce.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost-utility of bacterial lysate therapy as an add-on to standard care of preschool children with recurrent wheezing.

METHODS

To achieve the objectives of the study, we used a Markov simulation model with 3 mutually exclusive nonabsorbent states (regular Markov chain). Effectiveness parameters were obtained from a recent systematic review of the literature with meta-analyses (5 randomized controlled trials, 433 children). Cost data were obtained from hospital bills and from the national manual of drug prices in Colombia. The study was carried out from the perspective of the national health care system in Colombia. The main outcome of the model was quality-adjusted life-years. To assess the robustness of the model's results, we performed deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Compared with standard care, bacterial lysate add-on therapy to standard care was associated with lower overall treatment costs (US $694.03 vs $830.71 average cost per patient) and the greatest gain in QALYs (0.9211 vs 0.9154 QALYs on average per patient), thus showing dominance.

CONCLUSIONS

In Colombia, compared with standard care, bacterial lysate add-on therapy to standard care for treating preschool children with recurrent wheezing is a dominant strategy because it showed a greater gain in QALYs at lower total treatment costs.

As-Needed Use of Short-Acting β2-Agonists Alone Versus As-Needed Use of Short-Acting β2-Agonists Plus Inhaled Corticosteroids in Pediatric Patients With Mild Intermittent (Step 1) Asthma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although the efficacy of the as-needed use of short-acting β₂-agonists (SABAs) plus inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for treating children with mild intermittent asthma has been demonstrated, evidence of its cost-effectiveness is scarce.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of the as-needed use of SABAs alone versus the as-needed use of SABAs plus ICS in children 5 to 11 years old with mild intermittent (step 1) asthma but suffering from an exacerbation of asthma symptoms.

METHODS

A decision-analysis model was adapted. Effectiveness parameters were obtained from a randomized clinical trial. Cost data were obtained from hospital bills and from the national manual of drug prices in Colombia. The study was carried out from the perspective of the national health care system in Colombia. The main outcome of the model was a first course of prednisone for an asthma exacerbation (AE).

RESULTS

Compared with the use of SABAs alone, the as-needed use of SABAs plus ICS was associated with lower overall treatment costs (US$17.99 vs US$27.94 mean cost per patient) and a higher probability of a lack of a requirement for a first course of prednisone (0.6500 vs 0.5100), thus showing dominance.

CONCLUSIONS

In Colombia, compared with the use of albuterol alone, the use of beclomethasone dipropionate added to albuterol as needed for symptom relief is cost-effective in children 5 to 11 years old with mild intermittent (step 1) asthma, because it involves a higher probability of a lack of a requirement for prednisone for AE at lower total treatment costs.

Cost Utility of Intermittent Inhaled Corticosteroids in Preschoolers with Viral-Triggered Wheeze

Background: Evidence has demonstrated that adding intermittent inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) to treatment with short-acting b2-agonists (SABAs) in children 5 years of age and younger who experience intermittent viral-induced wheezing (VIW) reduces the risk of severe exacerbations. However, there is concern about whether the extra benefit offered by this drug outweighs the additional cost. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of intermittent ICS in children 5 years of age and younger who experience intermittent VIW. Methods: We constructed a probabilistic Markov model to estimate the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of intermittent ICS compared with SABA reliever therapy in preschoolers with viral-triggered wheezing in Colombia. Multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated at a willingness-to-pay value of $5,180. Results: In an analysis of the Markov cohort model, we estimated a gain of 0.2 QALYs per patient per year on intermittent ICS compared with SABA and a reduction of cost per patient of USD $37 per year. This position of dominance negated the need to calculate an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, our base case results were robust to variations of all assumptions and parameters. Conclusion: Adding intermittent ICS to treatment with SABAs in children 5 years of age and younger who experience intermittent VIW was found to be cost effective. These results could improve the use of health care resources, especially in settings with limited economic resources.

The use of ipratropium bromide for treating moderate to severe asthma exacerbations in pediatric patients in an emergency setting: A cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVES

Although the efficacy of the addition of ipratropium bromide (IB) to short-acting β2-agonists (SABAs) for treating children with moderate to severe asthma exacerbations has been demonstrated, evidence of its cost-effectiveness is scarce. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatment with a combination of SABAs and IB compared with SABAs alone for the treatment of children with moderate to severe asthma exacerbations.

METHODS

To achieve the objectives of the study, a decision-analysis model was adapted. Effectiveness parameters were obtained from a systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis. Cost data were obtained from hospital bills and from the national manual of drug prices in Colombia. The study was carried out from the perspective of the national healthcare system in Colombia. The main outcome of the model was avoidance of hospital admission.

RESULTS

In children with moderate to severe asthma exacerbations, the base-case analysis showed that compared to SABAs alone, treatment with a combination of SABAs and IB was associated with lower overall treatment costs (US$126.24 vs. US$170.69 mean cost per patient) and a higher probability of hospital admission avoided (0.7999 vs. 0.7100), thus leading to dominance. For children with severe asthma exacerbations, these values were US$132.99 versus US$170.69 and 0.7883 versus 0.7100, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In Colombia, when compared to therapy with SABAs alone, therapy with a combination of SABAs and IB for treating pediatric patients with moderate to severe asthma exacerbations involves a lower probability of hospital admission at lower treatment costs.

Cost-utility of omalizumab for the treatment of uncontrolled moderate-to-severe persistent pediatric allergic asthma in a middle-income country

OBJECTIVES

Although several randomized clinical trials performed in children 6 years and older with Omalizumab as add-on therapy have reported improvements in diverse clinical outcomes, the evidence regarding its cost effectiveness is not sufficient, especially in less-affluent countries, where the clinical and economic burden of the disease is the greatest. The aim of the present study was to perform a cost-utility analysis of adding omalizumab to standard treatment for treating pediatric patients with uncontrolled severe allergic asthma in Colombia, a middle-income country (MIC).

METHODS

A Markov-type model was developed to estimate costs and health outcomes of a simulated cohort of pediatric patients with persistent asthma treated over a 5-year period. The effectiveness data and transition probabilities were obtained from various sources, including systematic reviews with meta-analysis. Cost data were obtained from official databases provided by the Colombian Ministry of Health. The study was carried out from the perspective of the national healthcare system in Colombia. The main outcome was the variable ''quality-adjusted life-years'' (QALYs).

RESULTS

For the base-case analysis, the cost-utility analysis showed that compared with the standard treatment strategy, the omalizumab strategy involved higher costs (US$72,142.3 vs. $20,243.4 average cost per patient) and greater gain in QALYs (0.8718 vs. 0.8222 QALYs on average per patient). The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of omalizumab compared with standard treatment was US$82,748.1 per QALY CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that in Colombia, an MIC, compared with standard treatment, omalizumab is not a cost-effective strategy for treating pediatric patients with uncontrolled severe allergic asthma.

Dexamethasone or prednisolone for asthma exacerbations in children: A cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVES

Although a short course (ie, 3 to 5 days) of orally administered prednisolone is a common and widely accepted practice among clinicians for administering systemic corticosteroids in pediatric acute asthma, oral dexamethasone for 1 to 2 days is an attractive alternative to prednisolone due to its better palatability and compliance. However, a cost-effectiveness analysis regarding the use of dexamethasone compared to prednisolone is not sufficient, especially in lower- and middle-income countries. The objective of this study was to analyze the cost-effectiveness of prednisolone vs oral dexamethasone for treating pediatric asthma exacerbations.

METHODS

Using a decision-analysis model, we analyzed the cost-effectiveness of prednisolone vs oral dexamethasone for treating acute pediatric asthma. Effectiveness parameters were derived from a systematic review of the published literature. Data for costs were acquired from hospital accounts and from an official national database, the national manual of drug prices in Colombia. The study was carried out from a Colombian third-party payer perspective. The principal outcome of the model was the avoidance of hospitalization.

RESULTS

The base-case analysis showed that compared to dexamethasone, administering prednisolone was associated with lower overall treatment costs (US$93.97 vs US$104.91 mean cost per patient) without a significant difference in the probability of hospitalization avoided (.9108 vs .9108).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study shows that in Colombia, a middle-income country, compared with oral dexamethasone, the use of prednisolone for treating acute pediatric asthma is cost-effective, yielding a similar probability of hospitalization at lesser overall costs.

Commercial valved spacers versus home-made spacers for delivering bronchodilator therapy in pediatric acute asthma: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Objective: Although valved spacers are the preferred method for administering metered-dose inhaler bronchodilators such as albuterol in pediatric acute asthma, their high cost and their lack of availability have limited their use, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Because of this, it is a common practice to use home-made spacers, although a formal analysis evaluating their cost-effectiveness is lacking. Therefore, the objective of this study was to analyze the cost-effectiveness of home-made spacers compared to commercial valved spacers for delivering bronchodilator therapy in pediatric acute asthma.Methods: A decision-analysis model was used to estimate health outcomes and costs of a simulated cohort of pediatric patients treated for acute asthma. Effectiveness parameters were obtained from a systematic review of the literature. Cost data were obtained from hospital bills and from the national manual of drug prices in Colombia. The study was carried out from the perspective of the national healthcare system in Colombia, a middle-income country (MIC). The main outcome of the model was avoidance of hospital admission.Results: Base-case analysis showed that compared to commercial valved spacers, administering bronchodilators with home-made spacers results in lower overall treatment costs (US$126.75 vs. US$128.59 average cost per patient) without a significant difference in the probability of hospitalization avoided (0.8500 vs. 0.8500).Conclusions: The present study shows that in Colombia, an MIC, compared with commercial valved spacers, the use of home-made spacers for administering bronchodilator therapy is more cost-effective because it yields a similar probability of hospital admission at lower overall treatment costs.