G. Zagidullina, Anar Zhussupova, Zaid Zholdassоv, A. Tabarov, Z. Salpynov
{"title":"Pharmacoeconomic Analysis of Use of Parenteral Nutrition Medications in Kazakhstan's Health System’s Conditions","authors":"G. Zagidullina, Anar Zhussupova, Zaid Zholdassоv, A. Tabarov, Z. Salpynov","doi":"10.32921/2225-9929-2021-2-42-41-51","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To study the clinical effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of parenteral nutrition medications. Methods. A modelling and a cost-effectiveness assessment were applied concerning the use of the NuTRIflex Lipid group medications. A comparative analysis of the parenteral nutrition medications’ effectiveness was performed, using cost-minimization, missed opportunities and budget impact analyses. The analysis was carried out by modelling in MS Excel Software. Results. The cost-minimization analysis demonstrated that NuTRIflex medications (NuTRIflex Lipid plus, NuTRIflex Lipid Special) were the least expensive options of parenteral nutrition for a minimum level of a daily dose’s cost as well as for a minimum level of costs for side-effects elimination. Based on the results of the missed opportunities analysis, the use of NuTRIflex Lipid peri medication will provide 55.8% (without side effects consideration) and 85.4% (with side effects consideration) more patients with parenteral nutrition, than that of Oliclinomel N4-550 E. From a payer’s perspective in the healthcare system, the budget impact analysis showed that the use of NuTRIflex Lipid peri will save costs equaling to 2.1 billion tenge versus Oliclinomel N4-550 E (on the assumption that side effects take place). Conclusion. It is impossible to make a definite conclusion on the superiority of NuTRIflex Lipid’s clinical effectiveness and safety over Oliclinomel and vice versa, since there are no direct comparative studies, assessing clinical effectiveness and safety in evidence-based medicine databases. More patients will receive parenteral nutrition if the NuTRIflex Lipid medication is used compared with the use of Oliclinomel, and it would be cost-saving from a payer’s perspective in Kazakhstan’s health system. Keywords: Nutritional support, parenteral nutrition, cost-minimization analysis, missed opportunity, budget impact analysis","PeriodicalId":11852,"journal":{"name":"Ethiopian Journal of Health Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethiopian Journal of Health Development","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32921/2225-9929-2021-2-42-41-51","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To study the clinical effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of parenteral nutrition medications. Methods. A modelling and a cost-effectiveness assessment were applied concerning the use of the NuTRIflex Lipid group medications. A comparative analysis of the parenteral nutrition medications’ effectiveness was performed, using cost-minimization, missed opportunities and budget impact analyses. The analysis was carried out by modelling in MS Excel Software. Results. The cost-minimization analysis demonstrated that NuTRIflex medications (NuTRIflex Lipid plus, NuTRIflex Lipid Special) were the least expensive options of parenteral nutrition for a minimum level of a daily dose’s cost as well as for a minimum level of costs for side-effects elimination. Based on the results of the missed opportunities analysis, the use of NuTRIflex Lipid peri medication will provide 55.8% (without side effects consideration) and 85.4% (with side effects consideration) more patients with parenteral nutrition, than that of Oliclinomel N4-550 E. From a payer’s perspective in the healthcare system, the budget impact analysis showed that the use of NuTRIflex Lipid peri will save costs equaling to 2.1 billion tenge versus Oliclinomel N4-550 E (on the assumption that side effects take place). Conclusion. It is impossible to make a definite conclusion on the superiority of NuTRIflex Lipid’s clinical effectiveness and safety over Oliclinomel and vice versa, since there are no direct comparative studies, assessing clinical effectiveness and safety in evidence-based medicine databases. More patients will receive parenteral nutrition if the NuTRIflex Lipid medication is used compared with the use of Oliclinomel, and it would be cost-saving from a payer’s perspective in Kazakhstan’s health system. Keywords: Nutritional support, parenteral nutrition, cost-minimization analysis, missed opportunity, budget impact analysis
期刊介绍：
The Ethiopian Journal of Health Development is a multi and interdisciplinary platform that provides space for public health experts in academics, policy and programs to share empirical evidence to contribute to health development agenda.
We publish original research articles, reviews, brief communications and commentaries on public health issues, to inform current research, policy and practice in all areas of common interest to the scholars in the field of public health, social sciences and humanities, health practitioners and policy makers. The journal publishes material relevant to any aspect of public health from a wide range of fields: epidemiology, environmental health, health economics, reproductive health, behavioral sciences, nutrition, psychiatry, social pharmacy, medical anthropology, medical sociology, clinical psychology and wide arrays of social sciences and humanities.
The journal publishes the following types of contribution:
1) Peer-reviewed original research articles and critical or analytical reviews in any area of social public health. These papers may be up to 3,500 words excluding abstract, tables, and references. Papers below this limit are preferred.
2) Peer-reviewed short reports of research findings on topical issues or published articles of between 2000 and 4000 words.
3) Brief communications, and commentaries debating on particular areas of focus, and published alongside, selected articles.
4) Special Issues bringing together collections of papers on a particular theme, and usually guest edited.
5) Editorial that flags critical issues of public health debate for policy, program and scientific consumption or further debate
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
