Cost-effectiveness of telephone or surgery asthma reviews: economic analysis of a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Only about a third of people with asthma attend an annual review. Clinicians need to identify cost-effective ways to improve access and ensure regular review. AIM: To compare the cost-effectiveness of nurse-led telephone with face-to-face asthma reviews. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cost-effectiveness analysis based on a 3-month randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Four general practices in England. METHOD: Adults due an asthma review were randomised to telephone or face-to-face consultations. Trial nurses recorded proportion reviewed, duration of consultation, and abortive calls/missed appointments. Data on use of healthcare resources were extracted from GP records. Cost-effectiveness was assessed from the health service perspective; sensitivity analyses were based on proportion reviewed and duration of consultation. RESULTS: A total of 278 people with asthma were randomised to surgery (n = 141) or telephone (n = 137) review. Onehundred-and-one (74%) of those with asthma in the telephone group were reviewed versus 68 (48%) in the surgery group (P <0.001). Telephone consultations were significantly shorter (mean duration telephone = 11.19 minutes [standard deviation {SD} = 4.79] versus surgery = 21.87 minutes [SD = 6.85], P <0.001). Total respiratory healthcare costs per patient over 3 months were similar (telephone = pounds sterling 64.49 [SD = 73.33] versus surgery = pounds sterling 59.48 [SD = 66.02], P = 0.55). Total costs of providing 101 telephone versus 68 face-to-face asthma reviews were also similar (telephone = pounds sterling 725.84 versus surgery = pounds sterling 755.70), but mean cost per consultation achieved was lower in the telephone arm (telephone = pounds sterling 7.19 [SD = 2.49] versus surgery = pounds sterling 11.11 [SD = 3.50]; mean difference = - pounds sterling 3.92 [95% confidence interval = - pounds sterling 4.84 to pounds sterling 3.01], P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Telephone consultations enable a greater proportion of asthma patients to be reviewed at no additional cost to the health service. This mode of delivering care improves access and reduces cost per consultation achieved.     

Accessibility, clinical effectiveness, and practice costs of providing a telephone option for routine asthma reviews: phase IV controlled implementation study.

BACKGROUND: Attendance for routine asthma reviews is poor. A recent randomised controlled trial found that telephone consultations can cost-effectively and safely enhance asthma review rates; however, concerns have been expressed about the generalisability and implementation of the trial's findings. AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of a telephone option as part of a routine structured asthma review service. DESIGN OF STUDY: Phase IV controlled before-and-after implementation study. SETTING: A large UK general practice. METHOD: Using existing administrative groups, all patients with active asthma (n = 1809) received one of three asthma review services: structured recall with a telephone-option for reviews versus structured recall with face-to-face-only reviews, or usual-care (to assess secular trends). Main outcome measures were: proportion of patients with active asthma reviewed within the previous 15 months (Quality and Outcomes Framework target), mode of review, enablement, morbidity, and costs to the practice. RESULTS: A routine asthma review was provided for 397/598 (66.4%) patients in the telephone-option group compared with 352/654 (53.8%) in the face-to-face-only review group: risk difference 12.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 7.2 to 17.9, P<0.001). The usual-care group achieved a review rate of 282/557 (50.6%). Morbidity was equivalent in the three groups; however, enablement (P = 0.03) and confidence (P = 0.007) in asthma management were greater in the telephone-option versus face-to-face-only group. The cost per review achieved by providing the telephone-option service was lower than the face-to-face-only service (10.03 pounds versus 12.74 pounds, mean difference 2.71 pounds; 95% CI = 1.92 to 3.50, P<0.001); usual-care costs were 11.85 pounds per review achieved. CONCLUSION: Routinely offering telephone reviews cost-effectively increased asthma review rates, enhancing patient enablement and confidence with management, with no detriment to asthma morbidity. Practices should consider a telephone option for their asthma review service.     

Asthma Control Test: reliability, validity, and responsiveness in patients not previously followed by asthma specialists

BACKGROUND: The development of the Asthma Control Test (ACT), a short, simple, patient-based tool for identifying patients with poorly controlled asthma, was recently described in patients under the routine care of an asthma specialist. OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the reliability and validity of the ACT in a longitudinal study of asthmatic patients new to the care of an asthma specialist. METHODS: Patients (n=313) completed the ACT and the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) at 2 physician visits (4-12 weeks apart). Pulmonary function was measured, and asthma specialists rated asthma control. RESULTS: Internal consistency reliability of the ACT was 0.85 (baseline) and 0.79 (follow-up). Test-retest reliability was 0.77. Criterion validity was demonstrated by significant correlations between baseline ACT scores and baseline specialists' ratings of asthma control (r=0.52, P<.001) and ACQ scores (r=-0.89, P<.001). Discriminant validity was demonstrated, with significant (P<.001) differences in mean ACT scores across patients differing in asthma control, pulmonary function, and treatment recommendation. Responsiveness of the ACT to changes in asthma control and lung function was demonstrated with significant correlations between changes in ACT scores and changes in specialists' ratings (r=0.44, P<.001), ACQ scores (r=-0.69, P<.001), and percent predicted FEV1 values (r=0.29, P<.001). An ACT score of 19 or less provided optimum balance of sensitivity (71%) and specificity (71%) for detecting uncontrolled asthma. CONCLUSIONS: The ACT is reliable, valid, and responsive to changes in asthma control over time in patients new to the care of asthma specialists. A cutoff score of 19 or less identifies patients with poorly controlled asthma. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: In a clinical setting the ACT should be a useful tool to help physicians identify patients with uncontrolled asthma and facilitate their ability to follow patients' progress with treatment.     

Discrepancy between clinical asthma control assessment tools and fractional exhaled nitric oxide

BACKGROUND: Asthma is an inflammatory disease, yet clinical tools that evaluate asthma control do not include measures of inflammation. OBJECTIVE: To determine the correlation between fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and each of 5 asthma control evaluation tools, namely, the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), the Asthma Control Test (ACT), the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) goals of therapy, the Joint Task Force Practice Parameter (JTFPP) on attaining optimal asthma control, and the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines. METHODS: Patients 6 years or older who had asthma were clinically evaluated by an asthma specialist. Patients completed the ACT and ACQ and underwent spirometry and FeNO measurement. The physician was blinded to FeNO results until asthma control assessments were concluded. Correlations between FeNO level and each clinical evaluation tool were calculated. RESULTS: One hundred patients 6 to 86 years old were enrolled. No significant association was found between FeNO level and asthma control based on ACQ (P > .99), ACT (P = .53), NAEPP (P = .53), JTFPP (P = .30), or GINA (P = .86) criteria. Agreement was high among the NAEPP, the JTFPP, and GINA; moderate between the ACQ and the ACT; and poor to fair between the ACT or the ACQ and the other 3 tools. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to clinical evaluation, the incorporation of FeNO measurement in evaluating asthma is likely to lead to a more optimal pharmacotherapy, guidance in adjusting the dosage of anti-inflammatory agents, and positive long-term disease outcome.     

Systematic care of diabetic patients in one general practice: how much does it cost?

This study examines the costs of running a method of systematic care for diabetic patients in one general practice--the monthly 'diabetic day'. Doctor, nurse, chiropodist, dietitian, clerical officer, building and stationery costs were included in the evaluation. The study took place in an inner city practice of seven partners based in a health centre. The cost per year of running the diabetic days was 1854.53 pounds to the practice and 4465.69 pounds to the National Health Service (1989 prices). The cost to the practice included family health services authority reimbursements and excluded the cost of the chiropodist and dietitian. The cost per attendance was 38.17 pounds to the NHS and 15.85 pounds to the practice while the cost per patient per year was 58.00 pounds to the NHS and 24.08 pounds to the practice. The practice suffered a net loss after taking into account health promotion clinic payments received from the family health services authority. The cost to the NHS of each attendance at the practice was considerably greater than estimates of the cost of attendance at the outpatients department of a local trust hospital. However, it is argued that general practice has an essential role in the improvement of diabetic surveillance, and that an adequate remuneration package could transform the care of many patients with diabetes.     

Managing earwax in primary care: efficacy of self-treatment using a bulb syringe.

BACKGROUND: Irrigating ears to remove wax is a time-consuming procedure in UK primary care. In many other countries bulb syringes are used for self-clearance of earwax but evidence of their effectiveness is lacking. AIM: To compare the effectiveness of self-treatment bulb syringes with routine care. DESIGN OF STUDY: Open, randomised, controlled trial. SETTING: Seven practices in Hampshire, UK. METHOD: Participants were 237 patients attending their GP or practice nurse with symptomatic occluding earwax. A further 128 patients did not want to be part of the randomisation but allowed their data to be analysed. Patients randomised to intervention (n = 118) were given ear drops, a bulb syringe, and instructions on its use. Patients in the control group (n = 119) received ear drops, followed by ear irrigation by the GP or practice nurse. Main outcome measures were symptoms (on a 7-point scale), wax clearance, need for further treatment, and the acceptability of treatment. RESULTS: Comparing patients using the bulb syringe with those treated with conventional irrigation, the change in mean symptom score was -0.81 and -1.26 respectively (difference -0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.11 to -0.79) and, regarding the proportion requiring no further irrigation, 51% and 69% respectively. Although irrigation was preferred by more patients, most patients using the bulb syringe would use it again (75% versus 100%) and were satisfied with treatment (71% versus 99%). CONCLUSIONS: Advising patients with ears blocked by wax to try bulb syringing before irrigation is effective and acceptable, and could significantly reduce the use of NHS resources.     

Cost-effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol for maintenance and reliever asthma therapy

BACKGROUND: Budesonide/formoterol (Symbicort) Maintenance and Reliever Therapy (SMART) is an effective asthma-management approach that treats symptoms with rapid increases in budesonide/formoterol. The cost-effectiveness of SMART vs higher fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol or salmeterol/fluticasone is unknown. METHODS: This 6-month, double-blind study randomized patients with asthma uncontrolled by inhaled corticosteroids alone (n = 3335; age > or =12 years) to budesonide/formoterol 160/4.5 microg b.i.d. plus additional doses as needed (SMART), budesonide/formoterol 320/9 microg b.i.d. plus as-needed terbutaline, or salmeterol/fluticasone 50/250 microg b.i.d. plus as-needed terbutaline. Economic analysis, assuming health care and societal perspectives, applied 2004 UK and Australian unit costs to pooled resource-use data. The effectiveness variable was the rate of severe exacerbations/patient/6 months. RESULTS: Patients treated using the SMART approach experienced fewer severe exacerbations than fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol and salmeterol/fluticasone patients (0.12 vs 0.16 and 0.19 events/patient/6 months, respectively; P < or = 0.0048). Budesonide/formoterol (Symbicort) Maintenance and Reliever Therapy provided similar improvements in other markers of asthma control at a lower overall daily inhaled corticosteroid dose compared with fixed-dose treatment. Study drug costs accounted for a majority of both direct costs (DC; 78-87%) and total costs (TC; 50-63%) for all treatments, and were significantly lower in the SMART group compared with the fixed-dose groups (P < or = 0.0014). Direct and TC per patient/6 months were lower for SMART vs salmeterol/fluticasone (DC:-AUS$154, P < 0.0001; TC:-AUS$163, P = 0.0036;-87 pound sterling, P = 0.0026) and vs budesonide/formoterol using UK costs (DC:-73 pounds sterling, P < 0.0001; TC:- 91 pounds sterling, P = 0.0014). Costs tended to be lower for SMART vs budesonide/formoterol using Australian costs (DC:-AUS$35, P = 0.16; TC:-AUS$70, P = 0.20). Results were stable under sensitivity testing. Indirect resource use and cost were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: Compared with higher fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol and salmeterol/fluticasone, SMART reduces the incidence of severe exacerbations at a lower or similar overall cost and can be considered a cost-effective treatment regimen.     

A randomised controlled trial of clinics in secondary schools for adolescents with asthma.

AIM: To compare a nurse-led clinic in schools versus care in general practice for adolescents with asthma. DESIGN OF STUDY: Randomised controlled trial in four schools; parallel observational study in two schools. SETTING: Six comprehensive schools. METHOD: In the randomised trial, pupils were invited to attend asthma review at a nurse-led clinic either in school, or in general practice. The parallel observational study compared pupils invited to practice care within and outside the randomised trial. Primary outcome measures were attendance for asthma review, symptom control, and quality of life. Secondary outcomes were knowledge, attitudes, inhaler technique, use of steroids, school absence, peak flow rate, preference for future care, health service utilisation, and costs. RESULTS: School clinic pupils were more likely to attend an asthma review than those randomised to practice care (90.8% versus 51.0% overall [P < 0.001, not consistent across schools]). No differences were observed in symptom control (P = 0.42) or quality of life (P = 0.63). Pupils attending school clinics had greater knowledge of asthma (difference = +0.38, 95% CI = 0.19 to 0.56), more positive attitudes (difference = +0.21, 95% CI = 0.05 to 0.36), and better inhaler technique (P < 0.001, not consistent across all schools). No differences were observed in school absence or peak flow rate. A majority (63%) of those who had received care at school preferred this model in future. Median costs of providing care at school and at the practice were 32.10 Pounds and 19.80 Pounds, respectively. No differences were observed between the groups in the observational comparison on any outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The schools asthma clinic increased uptake of asthma reviews. There were improvements in various process measures, but not in clinical outcomes.     

Omalizumab versus 'Usual Care': Results from a Naturalistic Longitudinal Study in Routine Care

Background: It is unclear how far the superior efficacy of omalizumab, established in randomized controlled clinical trials of patients with severe allergic asthma (SAA), translates into routine practice and when compared to matched controls. Methods: New-onset omalizumab-treated (OT) patients with SAA (n = 53) were compared to a matched control group of usual-care (UC) patients (n = 53). Treatment and procedures were naturalistic. Subsequent to a baseline assessment, patients were followed up over at least 6 months with at least two follow-up assessments. Primary clinical outcomes were the number of asthma attacks, persistence of asthma symptoms and degree of control [asthma control test (ACT), Global Initiative for Asthma]. Secondary outcome criteria were quality of life (Euro-Qol 5D) and number of medications. For each outcome we compared within-group effects from baseline to 6-month follow-up as well as between-group effects. Results: OT patients showed significant improvements in number [effect size (ES) = 0.03] and frequency (ES = 0.04) of asthma attacks as well as asthma control (ES = 0.09), whereas controls revealed no significant improvements in these measures. Further improvements in the OT group were found for 'perceived control always' (ACT, p = 0.006), no impairment (ACT, p = 0.02), reduction of sickness days (p = 0.002) and number of medications needed (p = 0.001). Conclusions: Substantial beneficial effects of omalizumab, similar to those observed in controlled trials and after marketing studies, were confirmed, particularly with regard to the reduction of asthma attacks, persistence of symptoms, asthma control and reduction of concomitant asthma medications. This study provides a tougher test and generalizable evidence for the effectiveness of omalizumab in routine care.     

Comparing the cost of nurse practitioners and GPs in primary care: modelling economic data from randomised trials

BACKGROUND: The role of nurse practitioners in primary care has recently expanded. While there are some outcome data available for different types of consultations, little is known about the relative cost. AIM: To compare the cost of primary care provided by nurse practitioners with that of salaried GPs. DESIGN OF STUDY: Synthesis, modelling, and analysis of published data from the perspective of general practices and the NHS. DATA SOURCES: Two published randomised controlled trials. METHOD: A dataset of resource use for a simulated group of patients in a typical consultation was modelled. Current unit costs were used to obtain a consensus mean cost per consultation. RESULTS: Mean cost of a nurse practitioner consultation was estimated at 9.46 UK pounds (95% confidence interval [CI] = 9.16 to 9.75 pounds) and for a GP was 9.30 UK pounds (95% CI = 9.04 to 9.56 pounds) according to salary and overheads, that is, from the perspective of general practices. From the NHS perspective, which included training costs, the estimated mean costs were 30.35 UK pounds (95% CI = 27.10 to 33.59 pounds) and 28.14 UK pounds (95% CI = 25.43 to 30.84 pounds) respectively. Sensitivity analysis suggested that the time spent by GPs contributing to nurse practitioners' consultations (including return visits) was an important factor in increasing costs associated with nurse practitioners. CONCLUSION: Employing a nurse practitioner in primary care is likely to cost much the same as employing a salaried GP according to currently available data. There is considerable variability of qualifications and experience of nurse practitioners, which suggests that skill-mix decisions should depend on the full range of roles and responsibilities rather than cost.     

Electronic patient-provider communication: will it offset office visits and telephone consultations in primary care?

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Electronic patient-provider communication promises to improve efficiency and effectiveness of clinical care. This study aims to explore whether a secure web-based messaging system is an effective way of providing patient care in general practices. METHOD: We conducted a randomised controlled trail and recruited 200 patients from the waiting area in one primary clinic in Norway. Participants were randomised to either the intervention group, which received access to a secure messaging system, or the control group receiving standard care without such access. Primary outcome measures were number of online consultations, telephone consultations and office visits in the two groups. Data were derived from patient records and collected 1 year prior to (baseline), and 1 year after the intervention. RESULTS: Forty-six percent of the patients who were given access to the messaging system (n=99) used the online communication system on at least one occasion (ranging from 1 to 17 messages per patient per year). A total of 147 electronic messages were sent to six general practitioners during a 1-year trial period. Eleven percent of the messages were to schedule an appointment. In 10% of the messages, the GP was unable to respond adequately and recommended an office visit. The reduction in office visits over time was greater for the intervention group than for the control group (P=0.034). There was however no significant difference in the number of telephone consultations between the groups during the study (P=0.258). CONCLUSION: The use of a secure electronic messaging system reduced the number of office visits at the general practice, but not phone consultations.     

Poor asthma control and exposure to traffic pollutants and obesity in older adults

BackgroundEnvironmental and host predictors of asthma control in older asthmatic patients (>65 years old) are poorly understood.ObjectiveTo examine the effects of residential exposure to traffic exhaust and other environmental and host predictors on asthma control in older adults.MethodsOne hundred four asthmatic patients 65 years of age or older from allergy and pulmonary clinics in greater Cincinnati, Ohio, completed the validated Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), pulmonary function testing, and skin prick testing to 10 common aeroallergens. Patients had a physician's diagnosis of asthma, had significant reversibility in forced expiratory volume in 1 second or a positive methacholine challenge test result, and did not have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The mean daily residential exposure to elemental carbon attributable to traffic (ECAT) was estimated using a land-use regression model. Regression models were used to evaluate associations among independent variables, ACQ scores, and the number of asthma exacerbations, defined as acute worsening of asthma symptoms requiring prednisone use, in the past year.ResultsIn the adjusted model, mean daily residential exposure to ECAT greater than 0.39 μg/m³ was significantly associated with poorer asthma control based on ACQ scores (adjusted β = 2.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58–5.12; P = .02). High ECAT levels were also significantly associated with increased risk of asthma exacerbations (adjusted odds ratio, 3.24; 95% CI, 1.01–10.37; P = .05). A significant association was found between higher body mass index and worse ACQ scores (adjusted β = 1.15; 95% CI, 0.53–1.76; P < .001). Atopic patients (skin prick test positive) had significantly better ACQ scores than nonatopic patients (adjusted β = ?0.39; 95% CI, ?0.67 to ?0.11; P < .01).ConclusionHigher mean daily residential exposure to traffic exhaust, obesity, and nonatopic status are associated with poorer asthma control among older asthmatic patients.     

The effects of telephone consultation and triage on healthcare use and patient satisfaction: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: In recent years there has been a growth in the use of the telephone consultation for healthcare problems. This has developed, in part, as a response to increased demand for GP and accident and emergency department care. AIM: To assess the effects of telephone consultation and triage on safety, service use, and patient satisfaction. DESIGN OF STUDY: We looked at randomised controlled trials, controlled studies, controlled before/after studies, and interrupted time series of telephone consultation or triage in a general healthcare setting. SETTING: All healthcare settings were included but the majority of studies were in primary care. METHOD: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EPOC specialised register, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, SIGLE, and the National Research Register and checked reference lists of identified studies and review articles. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed study quality. RESULTS: Nine studies met our inclusion criteria: five randomised controlled trials; one controlled trial; and three interrupted time series. Six studies compared telephone consultation with normal care; four by a doctor, one by a nurse, and one by a clinic clerk. Three of five studies found a significant decrease in visits to GPs but two found an increase in return consultations. In general at least 50% (range = 25.5-72.2%) of calls were handled by telephone consultation alone. Of seven studies reporting accident and emergency department visits, six showed no difference between the groups and one--of nurse telephone consultation--found an increase. Two studies reported deaths and found no difference between nurse telephone consultation and normal care. CONCLUSIONS: Although telephone consultation appears to have the potential to reduce GP workload, questions remain about its effect on service use. Further rigorous evaluation is needed with emphasis on service use, safety, cost, and patient satisfaction.     

Early effects of Asthma Prevention Program on asthma diagnosis and hospitalization in urban population of Poland

BACKGROUND: Asthma is one of the commonest public health problems in Poland and the commonest chronic disorder in children. Lodz Regional Health Insurance Fund was a sponsor of the Prevention Asthma Program in 2000-03, directed at increasing early detection and providing optimal treatment of allergies by specialists in children. METHODS: All funds were divided between 127 primary and 12 specialized care centres participated in the programme. Primary care centre goals were: anamnestic information, mapping of allergy-causing factors, repeated auscultation of the lungs, bronchial dilation test, peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurement at the clinic and at home for 2 weeks. After preliminary diagnosis patients have been send to specialized centres. Specialized care centre goals were as follows: skin testing, spirometry, repeated bronchial dilation test, determination of eosinophilic white blood cells and eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) in blood. RESULTS: Increasing trend of new asthma diagnosis, expressed per 1000 inhabitants, was observed from 0.99 in 2000 to 2.19 in 2003. In the first year of Asthma Prevention Program, we observed more hospital episodes because of asthma exacerbation in comparison with year 1999 but from the second year of programme we showed systematically decreasing number of hospital episodes as a result of asthma exacerbation from 1.48 in 2000 to 0.84 in 2003. We found significantly decreasing trend in duration of hospitalization due to asthma exacerbation (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Effects of this programmes are: early identification of allergic diseases, mainly asthma, reduced number and shorter duration of hospitalization because of asthma exacerbation and establishing new Asthma Schools Education.     

Randomised controlled trial of near-patient testing for glycated haemoglobin in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND: Tight glycaemic control in people with type 2 diabetes can lead to a reduction in microvascular and possibly macrovascular complications. The use of near-patient (rapid) testing offers a potential method to improve glycaemic control. AIM: To assess the effect and costs of rapid testing for glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in people with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN OF STUDY: Pragmatic open randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Eight practices in Leicestershire, UK. METHOD: Patients were randomised to receive instant results for HbA1c or to routine care. The principal outcome measure was the proportion of patients with an HbA1c <7% at 12 months. We also assessed costs for the two groups. RESULTS: Of the 681 patients recruited to the study 638 (94%) were included in the analysis. The mean age at baseline was 65.7 years (SD = 10.8 years) with a median (interquartile range) duration of diabetes of 4(1-8) years. The proportion of patients with HbA1c < 7% did not differ significantly between the intervention and control groups (37 versus 38%, odds ratio 0.95 [95% confidence interval = 0.69 to 1.31]) at 12 months follow up. The total cost for diabetes-related care was 390 UK pounds per patient for the control group and 370 UK pounds for the intervention group. This difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Near-patient testing for HbA1c alone does not lead to outcome or cost benefits in managing people with type 2 diabetes in primary care. Further research is required into the use of rapid testing as part of an optimised patient management model including arrangements for patient review and testing.     

The cost-effectiveness of IVF in the UK: a comparison of three gonadotrophin treatments.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of women undergoing IVF treatment with recombinant FSH (rFSH) in comparison with highly purified urinary FSH (uFSH-HP) and human menopausal gonadotrophins (HMG). METHODS: A decision-analytic model was used to estimate cost-effectiveness ratios for 'the average cost per ongoing pregnancy' and 'incremental cost per additional pregnancy' for women entering into IVF treatment for a maximum of three cycles. The model was constructed based on a previously published large prospective randomized clinical trial comparing rFSH and uFSH-HP. Where necessary, these data were augmented with a combination of expert opinion, evidence from the literature and observational data relating to the management and cost of IVF treatment in the UK. The cost of rFSH, uFSH-HP and HMG were obtained from National Health Service list prices in the UK. RESULTS: The model predicted a cumulative pregnancy rate after three cycles of 57.1% for rFSH and 44.4% for both uFSH-HP and HMG. The cost of IVF treatment was 5135 pounds sterling for rFSH, 4806 pounds sterling for uFSH-HP and 4202 pounds sterling for HMG. When assessed in association with outcomes, the average cost per ongoing pregnancy was more favourable with rFSH (8992 pounds sterling) than with either uFSH-HP (10 834 pounds sterling) or HMG (9472 pounds sterling). The incremental cost per additional pregnancy was 2583 pounds sterling using rFSH instead of uFSH-HP and 7321 pounds sterling using rFSH instead of HMG. These results were robust to changes in the baseline assumptions of the model. CONCLUSION: rFSH is a cost-effective treatment strategy in ovulation induction prior to IVF.     

Relationship between symptoms and objective measures of airway obstruction in asthmatic patients.

The objective of this study was to determine the relationship between asthma symptoms and the degree of airway obstruction as measured by the forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) in a group of 64 asthmatic patients with clinically stable disease attending a university-based urban asthma clinic. Asthma symptoms did not correlate with the degree of airway obstruction as measured by prebronchodilator PEFR (total asthma symptom score vs PEFR: r = -0.214, p = 0.104, n = 59) and only correlated poorly with prebronchodilator FEV1 (total asthma symptom score vs FEV1: r = -0.256, p = 0.041, n = 64). These results lend support to the recommendation that airway obstruction should be measured objectively when assessing patients with chronic persistent asthma.     

Burden of allergic disease in the UK: secondary analyses of national databases

BACKGROUND: Although allergy represents an important source of patient morbidity and healthcare utilization, there is little reliable information on the overall disease burden posed by allergic conditions in the UK. OBJECTIVES: Focusing on the following conditions: allergic rhinitis, anaphylaxis, asthma, conjunctivitis, eczema/dermatitis, food allergy and urticaria/angioedema, we sought to (i) describe the prevalence, incidence and outcomes of allergic disorders; (ii) describe the NHS healthcare burden posed by allergic disorders; (iii) estimate the costs of allergic disorders from a healthcare perspective. METHODS: Secondary analyses of data from the Health Survey for England, Scottish Health Survey, International Study of Allergies and Asthma in Childhood, European Community Respiratory Health Survey, Morbidity Statistics from General Practice 1991/1992, Royal College of General Practitioners Weekly Returns Service, Prescribing Analysis and Cost data, Hospital Episodes Statistics and national mortality data. RESULTS: Thirty-nine percent of children and 30% of adults have been diagnosed with one or more atopic conditions. Six percent of general practice consultations and 0.8% of hospital admissions are for allergic diseases. Treatments for asthma and other allergic disorders currently account for 10% of primary care prescribing costs. Direct NHS costs for managing allergic problems are estimated at over one billion UK pounds per annum. CONCLUSIONS: Allergic disorders are common throughout the UK, affecting males and females of all ages and peoples from all social classes and ethnic groups. They currently represent a substantial burden of morbidity and health service cost.     

The Asthma Control Questionnaire as a clinical trial endpoint: past experience and recommendations for future use

The goal of asthma treatment is to control the disease according to guidelines issued by bodies such as the Global Initiative for Asthma. Effective control is dependent upon evaluation of symptoms, initiation of appropriate treatment and minimization of the progressive adverse effects of the disease and its therapies. Although individual outcome measures have been shown to correlate with asthma control, composite endpoints are preferred to enable more accurate and robust monitoring of the health of the individual patient. A number of validated instruments are utilized to capture these component endpoints; however, there is no consensus on the optimal instrument for use in clinical trials. The Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) has been shown to be a valid, reliable instrument that allows accurate and reproducible assessment of asthma control that compares favourably with other commonly used instruments. This analysis provides a summary of the use of ACQ in phase II, III and IV asthma trials. Comparisons between the ACQ and other instruments are also presented. Our analysis suggests that the ACQ is a valid and robust measure for use as a primary or secondary endpoint in future clinical trials.     

Comparing Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) and National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) asthma control criteria

Background

Adequate assessment of control is critical to asthma management. The Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) and the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) criteria are commonly used measures of asthma control.