Cost-effectiveness of licensed treatment options for restless legs syndrome in the UK and Sweden

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of pramipexole versus no treatment and ropinirole in moderate to very severe idiopathic restless legs syndrome (RLS) in the UK and Sweden.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed using clinical trial data for pramipexole and ropinirole. Model health states were based on the International RLS Study Group Rating Scale (IRLS) scores. Health states were: no (IRLS 0), mild (IRLS 1-14), moderate (IRLS 15-24), severe (IRLS 25-34), very severe RLS (IRLS 35-40) and death. Patients entered the model with an IRLS score > 15 matching the trial inclusion criteria of the pramipexole trials. Resource use and utilities were based on trial data, literature, a patient survey and a panel of physicians from the UK and Sweden in the absence of published information. A healthcare sector perspective was taken for the UK and a societal perspective for Sweden using 2004-2005 unit costs. The base case analysis took a 1-year timeframe.

RESULTS

In the UK the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for pramipexole was 3349 pounds sterling versus no treatment and a cost-saving of 92 pounds sterling against ropinirole. In Sweden, pramipexole produced cost-savings of Swedish Krona (SEK) 2381 (176 pounds sterling) versus no treatment and SEK 3564 (264 pounds sterling) against ropinirole. QALY gains in both countries were 0.095 versus no treatment and 0.007 versus ropinirole. Results compare well with UK cost-effectiveness thresholds of 20,000 pounds sterling/30,000 pounds sterling per QALY and are cost-saving for Sweden. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed results to be robust.

CONCLUSIONS

Pramipexole is cost-effective compared to no treatment and ropinirole for patients with moderate to very severe RLS.

Economic burden of post-acute myocardial infarction heart failure in the United Kingdom

Congestive heart failure (CHF) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. This study was carried out to quantify the burden of CHF, subsequent to acute myocardial infarction (AMI), from the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS). A systematic literature review of publications since 1990 was carried out on the economic burden of heart failure. The economic burden of post-AMI heart failure in the UK for the year 2000 was estimated for two scenarios: (1) Base-case estimate (post-AMI heart failure accounts for 20% of heart failure cases): Direct healthcare costs of pound 125-181 million (approx. 0.4% of total NHS spend) and nursing home costs of pound 27 million; (2) Upper estimate (post-AMI heart failure accounts for 50% of the total): Direct healthcare costs of pound 313-453 million (approx 1.0% of total NHS spend) and nursing home costs of pound 68 million. In conclusion, post-AMI heart failure imposes a significant direct economic burden on the UK.