Skip to main content
Log in

Choice of NSAID and Management Strategy in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Osteoarthritis

The Impact on Costs and Outcomes in the UK

  • Original Research Article
  • Evaluation of NSAID Therapies in OA/RA
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective:

Although nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are an effective therapy for rheumatoid arthritis, they are associated with significant adverse effects, the management of which imposes additional costs on the healthcare system. Prescribing NSAIDs which have a lower risk of major adverse effects as the first-line NSAID for patients with rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis may be expected to lead to an improvement in clinical outcomes and reduce overall treatment costs. This analysis examines data from a published randomised controlled trial of 5 NSAIDs to explore these hypotheses.

Design and Setting:

Data from a clinical trial comparing 5 NSAIDs were combined with published cost data to construct 2 clinical decision models, reflecting alternative approaches to the management of major and minor adverse effects in the UK.

Interventions:

The 5 NSAIDs evaluated in the analysis were nabumetone, diclofenac, ibuprofen, piroxicam and naproxen, although only the results for ibuprofen and nabumetone are reported.

Main outcome measures and results:

The total cost of care per patient receiving nabumetone was estimated to be between 25 pounds sterling (£) and £41 more expensive than ibuprofen. In a hypothetical cohort of 100 000 patients, there were between 690 and 821 more major adverse effects using ibuprofen than nabumetone. The cost per life-year gained (LYG) from using nabumetone rather than ibuprofen ranged between £1880 and £2517 (1995 values), depending upon the management of adverse effects.

Conclusions:

These results indicate that: (i) prescribing the newer, currently more expensive, NSAIDs will not necessarily lead to cost savings; (ii) the management of adverse effects can have a significant impact on costs; and (iii) the additional cost may be justifiable in terms of the mortality and morbidity gains associated with the new lower-risk NSAIDs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. British Medical Association (BMA) and The Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. British national formulary number 29. London: BMA, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wynne HA, Campbell M. Pharmacoeconomics of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Pharmacoeconomics 1994; 3 (2): 107–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. McIntosh E. The cost of rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol 1996; 35 (8): 781–90

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bloor K, Maynard A. Is there scope for improving the costeffective prescribing of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs? Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 9 (6): 484–96

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Eversmeyer W, Poland M, DeLapp RE, et al. Safety experience with Nabumetone versus Diclofenac, Naproxen, Ibuprofen and Piroxicam in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Am J Med 1993; 95 (S2A): 10S–8S

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Weinstein MC, Fineberg HV. Clinical decision analysis. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1980

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sheldon T. Problems of using modelling in the economic evaluation of health care. Health Econ 1996; 5: 1–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Lister BJ, Poland M, DeLapp RE. Efficacy of Nabumetone versus Diclofenac, Naproxen, Ibuprofen and Piroxicam in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Am J Med 1993; 95 Suppl. 2A: 2S–9S

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Department of Health and Welsh Office. Drug Tariff NHS England and Wales. London: HMSO, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  10. Chemist and Druggist Monthly Price List. Tonbridge: Benn Publications Ltd., 199510. Royal College of Physicians (RCP). Upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage: guideline for good practice and audit of management. London: RCP Publications

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hudson N, Faulkner G, Smith SJ, et al. Morbidity and treatment in elderly patients surviving hospital admission with bleeding peptic ulcer. Gut 1995; 37: 182–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Department of Health and Personal Social Services. Statistics for England. 1994 ed. London: HMSO, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  13. Allan R, Dykes P. A study of the factors influencing mortality rates from gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Q J Med 1976; 45: 533–50

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hunt PS, Hansky K, Korman MG. Mortality in patients with haematemesis and melaena: a prospective study. BMJ 1979; I: 1239–40

    Google Scholar 

  15. Katschinski BD, Logan RFA, Davies J, et al. Audit of mortality in upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Postgrad Med J 1989; 65: 913–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Department of Health. Register of cost-effectiveness studies. London: HMSO, 1994

  17. Charlton J, Murphy M. The health of adult Britain 1841-1994. Vol. 2. London: HMSO, 19

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris J. McCabe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McCabe, C.J., Akehurst, R.L., Kirsch, J. et al. Choice of NSAID and Management Strategy in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Osteoarthritis. Pharmacoeconomics 14, 191–199 (1998). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199814020-00007

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199814020-00007

Keywords

Navigation