Cost-effectiveness and Side Effects of Using Heparin and Enoxaparin as a Treatment for COVID-19-associated Coagulopathy

Nurul Iska Ulmarika Idris, A. Purba, Arifa Mustika, A. Veterini, M. Y. Alsagaff, Mohammad Qorib
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness and Side Effects of Using Heparin and Enoxaparin as a Treatment for COVID-19-associated Coagulopathy","authors":"Nurul Iska Ulmarika Idris, A. Purba, Arifa Mustika, A. Veterini, M. Y. Alsagaff, Mohammad Qorib","doi":"10.1177/0976500x231217140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To analyze the cost-effectiveness and side effects of Heparin and Enoxaparin anticoagulants in patients with COVID-19-associated coagulopathy (CAC). This was an observational study with a retrospective design of CAC patients from May 2020 to May 2022 in Surabaya, Indonesia, who received Heparin and Enoxaparin. Effectiveness was comprehensively evaluated as clinical outcomes including mortality, length of stay (LOS), laboratory results, and side effects. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation was analyzed by constructing Decision Tree modeling followed by Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) considering Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY), and Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER). In addition, probability sensitivity analysis was performed to consider the cost-effective intervention. A number of 274 samples were included from Medical Records and finance reports. Heparin has a higher mortality rate compared to Enoxaparin (13.9% vs. 23.9; p = 0.040), with no difference in the side effects ( p = 0.056). D-Dimer reported a significant change in values after receiving Heparin (2271.01 ± 4595.50 ng/mL) and Enoxaparin (2140.95 ± 5681.98 ng/mL), p = 0.019. Enoxaparin was more cost-effective in pharmacoeconomic analysis, with a US$130.58/QALY ACER value, while Heparin was US$138.67/QALY. Enoxaparin therapy has better effectiveness, while side effects and costs are similar to Heparin. However, Enoxaparin is far more cost-effective to use against CAC conditions than Heparin.","PeriodicalId":16780,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0976500x231217140","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To analyze the cost-effectiveness and side effects of Heparin and Enoxaparin anticoagulants in patients with COVID-19-associated coagulopathy (CAC). This was an observational study with a retrospective design of CAC patients from May 2020 to May 2022 in Surabaya, Indonesia, who received Heparin and Enoxaparin. Effectiveness was comprehensively evaluated as clinical outcomes including mortality, length of stay (LOS), laboratory results, and side effects. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation was analyzed by constructing Decision Tree modeling followed by Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) considering Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY), and Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER). In addition, probability sensitivity analysis was performed to consider the cost-effective intervention. A number of 274 samples were included from Medical Records and finance reports. Heparin has a higher mortality rate compared to Enoxaparin (13.9% vs. 23.9; p = 0.040), with no difference in the side effects ( p = 0.056). D-Dimer reported a significant change in values after receiving Heparin (2271.01 ± 4595.50 ng/mL) and Enoxaparin (2140.95 ± 5681.98 ng/mL), p = 0.019. Enoxaparin was more cost-effective in pharmacoeconomic analysis, with a US$130.58/QALY ACER value, while Heparin was US$138.67/QALY. Enoxaparin therapy has better effectiveness, while side effects and costs are similar to Heparin. However, Enoxaparin is far more cost-effective to use against CAC conditions than Heparin.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用肝素和依诺肝素治疗 COVID-19 相关凝血病的成本效益和副作用
分析肝素和依诺肝素抗凝药对 COVID-19 相关凝血病(CAC)患者的成本效益和副作用。这是一项采用回顾性设计的观察性研究,研究对象是 2020 年 5 月至 2022 年 5 月期间在印度尼西亚泗水接受肝素和依诺肝素治疗的 CAC 患者。研究根据死亡率、住院时间(LOS)、实验室结果和副作用等临床结果对疗效进行了全面评估。药物经济学评估通过构建决策树模型进行分析,然后进行成本效益分析(CEA),考虑质量调整生命年(QALY)和增量成本效益比(ICER)。此外,还进行了概率敏感性分析,以考虑干预措施的成本效益。从医疗记录和财务报告中纳入了 274 个样本。与依诺肝素相比,肝素的死亡率更高(13.9% 对 23.9;p = 0.040),副作用方面没有差异(p = 0.056)。接受肝素(2271.01 ± 4595.50 ng/mL)和依诺肝素(2140.95 ± 5681.98 ng/mL)治疗后,D-二聚体的值有明显变化,p = 0.019。在药物经济学分析中,依诺肝素更具成本效益,其 ACER 值为 130.58 美元/QALY,而肝素为 138.67 美元/QALY。依诺肝素的疗效更好,而副作用和成本与肝素相似。然而,与肝素相比,依诺肝素治疗 CAC 的成本效益要高得多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Embodiment of Pharmacist Intervention in Palliative Care and Augmentation of a Curriculum for Its Assessment Future of Pharmaceutical Industry: Role of Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and Robotics Pharmacodynamic Interaction of Areca catechu with Gliclazide in Wistar Rats Mechanistic Roles of Different Varieties of Honey on Wound Healing: Recent Update Modulation of Stem Cell Factor by Forskolin Inhibits the Progression of Tubule Interstitial Fibrosis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1