Advertisement

Duct Tape for Decision Makers: The Use of or Models in Pharmacoeconomics

  • Anke Richter
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 70)

Summary

Operations research (OR) provides an excellent set of tools for decision makers who regulate the use of new treatments or medications. The decision about whether to use a new treatment must typically be made well before long-term trials or database studies can be conducted. However, large amounts of information about new treatments are available from the clinical trials required for drug registration. OR models can synthesize this information and use it to predict expected costs and benefits of long-term treatment use within a given population. Such analysis provides valuable additional information for the decision maker when a novel treatment is initially being considered. These analyses are like duct tape for the decision maker: they are designed to make use of the best currently available information to help current decisions, thereby bridging the gap until better information becomes available.

Key words

Health economics Pharmacoeconomics Cost-benefit models Cost-effectiveness models 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    World Health Organization (1999). 1999 World Health Organization-International Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension. Journal of Hypertension, 17, 151–83.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Hoerger, T.J., M.V. Bala, J.L. Eggleston, D.E. Hilleman, J.M. Neutel, and P.A. Tomondy (1998). A comparative costeffectiveness study of three drugs for the treatment of mild-to-moderate hypertension. Pharmacy and Therapeutics, 23, 245–67.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Richter, A., C. Ostrowski, M.P. Dombeck, K. Gondek, and J.L. Hutchinson (2001). Delphi panel on current hypertension treatment patterns. Clinical Therapeutics, 23, 160–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Richter, A., K. Gondek, C. Ostrowski, M.P. Dombeck, and S. Lamb (2001). Mild-to-moderate uncomplicated hypertension, further analysis of a cost-effectiveness study of five drugs. Managed Care Interface, 14, 61–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Penna, P., E. Cox, T. Joseph, L. Lehman, T. Morrow, A. Richter, J. Sowers, and D. Tepper (2000). Roundtable Discussion, Part I-Epidemiologic, demographic, and treatment challenges in hypertension. Managed Care Interface, Supplement C, 10–16.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Penna, P., E. Cox, T. Joseph, L. Lehman, T. Morrow, A. Richter, J. Sowers, and D. Tepper (2000). Roundtable Discussion, Part II-Development of a Pharmacoeconomic Model in Hypertension. Managed Care Interface, Supplement C, 17–23.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Penna, P., E. Cox, T. Joseph, L. Lehman, T. Morrow, A. Richter, J. Sowers, and D. Tepper (2000). Roundtable Discussion, Part III-Hypertension Management in Health Plans. Managed Care Interface, Supplement C, 24–31.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2002). Guidelines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-infected adults and adolescents, http://www.hivatis.org/guidelines/adult/May23_02/AAMay23.pdf, Accessed February 4, 2002.
  9. [9]
    Vandamme, A.M., F. Houyez, D. Banhegyi, B. Clotet, G. De Schrijver, K.A. De Smet, W.W. Hall, R. Harrigan, N. Hellmann, K. Hertogs, C. Holtzer, B. Larder, D. Pillay, E. Race, J.C. Schmit, R. Schuurman, E. Schulse, A. Sonnerborg, and V. Miller (2001). Laboratory guidelines for the practical use of HIV drug resistance tests in patient follow-up. Antiviral Therapy, 6, 21–39.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Yeni, P.G., S.M. Hammer, C.C. Carpenter, D.A. Cooper, M.A. Fischl, J.M. Gatell, B.G. Gazzard, M.S. Hirsch, D.M. Jacobsen, D.A. Katzenstein, J.S. Montaner, D.D. Richman, M.S. Saag, M. Schechter, R.T. Schooley, M.A. Thompson, S. Vella, and P.A. Volberding (2002). Antiretroviral treatment for adult HIV infection in 2002, updated recommendations of the International AIDS Society-USA Panel. Journal of the American Medical Association, 288, 222–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Mellors, J.W., A. Munoz, J.V. Giorgi, J.B. Margolick, C.J. Tassoni, P. Gupta, L.A. Kingsley, J.A. Todd, A.J. Saah, R. Detels, J.P. Phair, and C.R. Rinaldo (1997). Plasma viral load and CD4+ lymphocytes as prognostic markers of HIV-1 infection. Annals of Internal Medicine, 126, 946–954.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. [13]
    American College of Surgeons (2003). Journal of the American College of Surgeons. http://www.facs.org, Accessed May 2003.
  13. [14]
    American Cancer Society (2003). http://www.cancer.org, Accessed May 2003.
  14. [15]
    National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2003). Clinical Practice Guidelines, http://www.nccn.org, Accessed May 2003.
  15. [16]
    National Cancer Institute (2003). Cancer Treatment PDQ® (Physician Data Query),-Health Professionals, http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancerinfo/pdq, Accessed May 2003.
  16. [17]
    DeVita, V.T., S. Hellman, and S.A. Rosenberg (2001). Cancer, Principles and Practice of Oncology. 6th Edition. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  17. [18]
    Tengs T.O. and A. Wallace (2000). One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. Medical Care, 38, 583–637.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anke Richter
    • 1
  1. 1.Naval Postgraduate SchoolDefense Resource Management InstituteMonterey

Personalised recommendations