IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/chy/respap/104chedp.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economic evaluation of drug therapy for hypercholesterolaemia in the United Kingdom

Author

Listed:
  • Mike Drummond

    (Centre for Health Economics, The University of York)

  • Alastair McGuire
  • Astrid Fletcher

Abstract

The last decade has shown a concerted effort in the UK to find ways of reducing coronary heart disease (CHD), culminating in the recent government target of a 30% reduction in the rates in people under the age of 65 years to be achieved between 1988 and 2000 by modification of the main risk factors: diet, smoking and physical fitness. It is generally accepted that the best prospect for achieving this is a combination of a population based approach, aimed at changing behaviour across the whole population, and intensified advice and treatment to those at highest risk. Several reports have discussed the relative importance of elevated cholesterol (hypercholesterolaemia) as a risk factor for CHD and the pros and cons of more concerted efforts to identify individuals with high cholesterol levels, either by mass screening or by opportunistic testing by GPs. For individuals who are found to have hypercholesterolaemia, it is generally agreed that diet should be the first line therapy. However, when dietary measures fail to reduce cholesterol to target levels, do the benefits of drug therapy justify the costs? This paper assesses the cost-effectiveness of drug therapy for primary prevention of hypercholesterolaemia in patients for whom dietary measures have failed. The estimates of effectiveness, in life years gained, are based on a risk assessment model, using epidemiological data and the results from clinical trials of cholesterol-lowering drugs. The cost per life year gained for men from treatment with one of the newer drugs (simvastatin 20mg daily) ranged from £11,900 to £56,650, depending on age and pre-treatment cholesterol level. Cost-effectiveness ratios for women were substantially higher. Primary prevention by drug therapy is most cost-effective at pre-treatment levels of 8mmol/L and above, and when other risk factors are taken into account. IN this case the cost-effectiveness ratios are comparable with those for a number of current health care interventions in the UK. These estimates of cost-effectiveness are the best that can be obtained using currently available epidemiology data. Whether or not drugs lower overall mortality is still currently being debated. Further clinical trials are underway with adequate statistical power to assess whether the previously reported increase in non-CHD deaths in intervention studies is a chance finding or not.

Suggested Citation

  • Mike Drummond & Alastair McGuire & Astrid Fletcher, 1993. "Economic evaluation of drug therapy for hypercholesterolaemia in the United Kingdom," Working Papers 104chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
  • Handle: RePEc:chy:respap:104chedp
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.york.ac.uk/media/che/documents/papers/discussionpapers/CHE%20Discussion%20Paper%20104.pdf
    File Function: First version, 1993
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Drummond, Michael F, 1989. "Output Measurement for Resource Allocation Decisions in Health Care," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 5(1), pages 59-74, Spring.
    2. Oster, G. & Epstein, A.M., 1986. "Primary prevention and coronary heart disease: The economic benefits of lowering serum cholesterol," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 76(6), pages 647-656.
    3. Abraham Mehrez & Amiram Gafni, 1989. "Quality-adjusted Life Years, Utility Theory, and Healthy-years Equivalents," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 9(2), pages 142-149, June.
    4. Maynard, Alan, 1991. "Developing the Health Care Market," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(408), pages 1277-1286, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. John A. Nyman, 2004. "Should the consumption of survivors be included as a cost in cost–utility analysis?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(5), pages 417-427, May.
    2. Stephen Morris, 1997. "A comparison of economic modelling and clinical trials in the economic evaluation of cholesterol‐modifying pharmacotherapy," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(6), pages 589-601, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael Drummond, 1991. "Economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals: science or marketing?," Working Papers 091chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    2. Hougaard, Jens Leth & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Østerdal, Lars Peter, 2013. "A new axiomatic approach to the evaluation of population health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 515-523.
    3. Milne, Robin G. & Torsney, Ben, 1997. "The Efficiency of Administrative Governance: The Experience of the Pre-reform British National Health Service," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 161-180, April.
    4. Eulàlia Dalmau & Jaume Puig, 1997. "Market structure and hospital efficiency: Evaluating potential effects of deregulation in a national health service," Economics Working Papers 214, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    5. Diecidue, E. & Schmidt, U. & Wakker, P.P., 2000. "A Theory of the Gambling Effect," Discussion Paper 2000-75, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    6. Mark Sculpher & Amiram Gafni, 2001. "Recognizing diversity in public preferences: The use of preference sub‐groups in cost‐effectiveness analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 317-324, June.
    7. Michael Drummond & Bernie O'Brienm, 1993. "Clinical importance, statistical significance and the assessment of economic and quality‐of‐life outcomes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 2(3), pages 205-212, October.
    8. Tønnesen, Philip, 2009. "Smoking cessation: How compelling is the evidence? A review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(Supplemen), pages 15-25, July.
    9. McNamee, Paul, 2007. "What difference does it make? The calculation of QALY gains from health profiles using patient and general population values," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(2-3), pages 321-331, December.
    10. Michele Kohli & Cheryl Attard & Annette Lam & Daniel Huse & John Cook & Chantal Bourgault & Evo Alemao & Donald Yin & Michael Marentette, 2006. "Cost Effectiveness of Adding Ezetimibe to Atorvastatin Therapy in Patients Not at Cholesterol Treatment Goal in Canada," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 24(8), pages 815-830, August.
    11. Olmstead, Todd & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1999. "The menu-setting problem and subsidized prices: drug formulary illustration," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 523-550, October.
    12. Propper, Carol, 1996. "Market structure and prices: The responses of hospitals in the UK National Health Service to competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 307-335, September.
    13. Krucien, Nicolas & Heidenreich, Sebastian & Gafni, Amiram & Pelletier-Fleury, Nathalie, 2020. "Measuring public preferences in France for potential consequences stemming from re-allocation of healthcare resources," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    14. Hoel, Michael, 2007. "What should (public) health insurance cover?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 251-262, March.
    15. Isabella Bonacci & Andrea Mazzitelli & Donato Morea, 2020. "Evaluating Climate between Working Excellence and Organizational Innovation: What Comes First?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-29, April.
    16. Carmen Herrero Blanco, 2001. "Individual Evidence Of Independence In Health Profiles Evaluation," Working Papers. Serie AD 2001-20, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    17. Olivier Chanel & Pascale Scapecchi & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2006. "How to correctly assess mortality benefits in public policies," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(5), pages 759-776.
    18. Bleichrodt, Han, 1997. "Health utility indices and equity considerations," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 65-91, February.
    19. MORENO-TERNERO, Juan & OSTERDAL, Lars P., 2014. "Normative foundations for equity-sensitive population health evaluation functions," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2014031, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    20. Catherine Buron & Catherine Le Galès & Anne-Marie Fericelli, 1997. "L'indicateur QALYs à la lumière de la théorie de l'utilité espérée multi-attribut explicitement décomposée," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 129(3), pages 55-71.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    CHD; lipids; cholesterol;
    All these keywords.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:chy:respap:104chedp. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Gill Forder (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/chyoruk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.