Cargando…

Cost-EffectivenessAnalysis of Ondansetron and Prochlorperazine for the Prevention of Postoperative Nausea andVomiting

OBJECTIVES: To compare the cost-effectiveness of 2 antiemetic agents, ondansetron and prochlorperazine, for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients undergoing total hip replacement or total knee replacement procedures. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness analysis model was...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Chang, Peter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy 2005
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10438286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15871642
http://dx.doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2005.11.4.317
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: To compare the cost-effectiveness of 2 antiemetic agents, ondansetron and prochlorperazine, for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients undergoing total hip replacement or total knee replacement procedures. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness analysis model was applied to data derived from a previous clinical study conducted in 1995 and 1996. This study involved 78 adult patients (62.8% female and 37.2% male) undergoing total hip replacement or total knee replacement procedures. Patients were enrolled in a randomized, double-blind manner to receive either ondansetron 4 mg intravenously (n=37) or prochlorperazine 10 mg intramuscularly (n=41) immediately upon completion of surgery and were monitored for occurrences of PONV during the subsequent 48 hours. In our analysis, we measured the cost-effectiveness ratio (C/E ratio), defined as the cost per successfully treated patient, for each antiemetic agent using the clinical data obtained from the previous study. RESULTS: The incidence of PONV and use of rescue antiemetics was significantly greater in the ondansetron group compared with the prochlorperazine group. The mean total costs of PONV management per patient in the prochlorperazine and ondansetron groups were $13.99 and $51.98, respectively (based on 2004 average wholesale prices [AWP]). The cost of successfully treating one patient with prochlorperazine and ondansetron was $31.87 and $275.01, respectively. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed adjusting the percent efficacy rate of each antiemetic and the drug cost of ondansetron (up to a 50% reduction in AWP). Prochlorperazine remained the dominant strategy across each scenario. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that prochlorperazine is a more cost-effective antiemetic compared with ondansetron for the prevention of PONV in a mixed gender, adult inpatient population undergoing total joint arthroplasty.