HealthSWEDE: costs with sublingual immunotherapy—a Swedish questionnaire study

Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology

Lars Ahlbeck¹  Morgan Andersson²  Carl Skröder²  Ulla Westin²  Cecilia Ahlström-Emanuelsson²  Lars-Olaf Cardell³  Petter Olsson³  Karl-Olof Welin⁴  Frida Hjalte⁴ 

[1] Allergy Center, Linköping University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden;Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden;Division of Ear, Nose and Throat Diseases, Department of Clinical Sciences, Intervention and Technology, Klinisk Vetenskap (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Intervention och teknik, H9 Öron-, näs, och halssjukdomar, 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden;The Swedish Institute for Health Economics (IHE), Lund, Sweden;

关键词: Absenteeism;    Direct costs;    Presenteeism;    Allergic rhinitis;    Indirect costs;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s13223-021-00560-3

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundThe aim of this cross-sectional survey was to compare the health-economic consequences for allergic rhinitis (AR) patients treated with sublingual Immunotherapy (SLIT) in terms of direct and indirect costs with a reference population of patients receiving standard of care pharmacological therapy.MethodsPrimary objective was to analyse the health-economic consequences of SLIT for grass pollen allergy in Sweden vs reference group waiting for subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT). A questionnaire was mailed to two groups of AR patients.ResultsThe questionnaire was distributed to 548 patients, 307 with SLIT and 241 in reference group (waiting for SCIT). Response rate was 53.8%. Mean annual costs were higher for reference patients than SLIT group; € 3907 (SD 4268) vs € 2084 (SD 1623) p < 0.001. Mean annual direct cost was higher for SLIT-patients, € 1191 (SD 465) than for reference, € 751 (SD 589) p < 0.001. Mean annual indirect costs for combined absenteeism and presenteeism were lower for patients treated with SLIT, € 912 (SD 1530), than for reference, € 3346 (SD 4120) p < 0.001, with presenteeism as main driver.ConclusionsSLIT seems to be a cost-beneficial way to treat seasonal AR. This information might be used to guide future recommendations.

【 授权许可】

CC BY