Previous Page  10 / 11 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 10 / 11 Next Page
Page Background

Page 24

Notes:

conferenceseries

.com

Volume 4

Journal of Community & Public Health Nursing

Nursing Summit 2018

November 08-09, 2018

November 08-09, 2018 Sydney, Australia

25

th

World Congress on

Nursing & Healthcare

Abdolsaleh Jafari et al., J Comm Pub Health Nurs 2018, Volume 4

DOI: 10.4172/2471-9846-C3-008

Cost-effectiveness analysis of IEV drug regimen versus ESHAP drug regimen for the patients with

Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in Iran

Abdolsaleh Jafari

1

, Nahid Hatam

2

, Shamim Yasami

2

, Mehdi Dehghani

2

and Andrew J Palmer

1

1

University of Tasmania, Australia

2

Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Iran

Background:

Chemotherapy for lymph node cancer is often composed of several drugs that are used in a treatment program.

The aim of this study was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of IEV drug regimen (Ifosfamide, Epirubicin and Etoposide)

versus ESHAP drug regimen (etoposide, methylprednisolone, high-dose cytarabine and cisplatin) in patients with lymphoma

in the south of Iran.

Method:

This was a cost-effectiveness analysis conducted in patients who were admitted to hospital in the south of Iran from

2014 to 2017. Using a decision tree model the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) was estimated. A threshold for

incremental costs per relapse/readmission avoided was determined by willingness to pay questionnaire administered to cancer

patients.

Result:

There were 105 people treated for lymphoma patients in the study period and who answered the willingness to pay

questionnaire. The average willingness to pay for relapse/readmission avoided was USD 10,000. The results showed that the

expected cost was USD 38,926 in the ESHAP arm and USD 33,949 in the IEV arm and the expected effectiveness was 60.1% in

the ESHAP arm and 57.8% in the IEV arm. The ICER was USD 216,391 per relapse and readmission avoided which was higher

than the threshold of USD 10,000.

Conclusion:

According to the results of this study, it is recommended that oncologists use IEV instead of ESHAP in the

treatment of patients with lymphoma and because of high costs of IEV drug costs, it is suggested that IEV drugs be reimbursed

by insurance.

Biography

Abdolsaleh Jafari is currently pursuing his PhD in Health Economics at Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. He is an Adjunct Researcher at Menzies

Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Australia. He has also worked as an Instructor and Faculty Member of Department of Health Economics at

Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. He has published more than 25 articles in peer review journals.

jafari.abdolsaleh@utas.edu.au