Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To compare the expected costs and outcomes of alternative strategies for the management of patients with erosive oesophagitis.

DESIGN:

There were 3 components to the overall analytic approach. First, a decision model was constructed to compare expected costs and outcomes of 6 management strategies. Second, principles of quantitative literature review and meta-analysis were used to determine probabilities of clinical events (i.e. oesophagitis healing and recurrence). Finally, principles of cost-effectiveness analysis were used to compare treatment alternatives in terms of dominance and incremental cost effectiveness. The viewpoint for the study was that of a provincial government payer for healthcare over a 1-year period.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS:

Healing rates were significantly higher for proton pump inhibitors (PPI) [p < 0.001]. Recurrence rates were significantly higher for intermittent therapy (placebo) and lower for regular dose PPI (p < 0.001). Maintenance prokinetic agent (PA) is dominated (i.e. more costly and less effective) and step-down maintenance PPI is dominated through principles of extended dominance. The 'efficient frontier' is represented by: maintenance H2-receptor antagonist (H2RA), intermittent PPI, step-down maintenance H2RA and maintenance PPI.

CONCLUSIONS:

The price of H2RA is a key factor influencing whether step-down maintenance PPI forms part of, or is contained within, the 'efficient frontier' of long term management for erosive oesophagitis.