| Autor: |
Rekha Mehani, Vijay Yadav, Tanu Garg, Sarang Ghodki, Rajnish Kumar Sankadia |
| Rok vydání: |
2016 |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
International Journal of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology. :508-512 |
| ISSN: |
2319-2003 |
| DOI: |
10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20160770 |
| Popis: |
Background: As we know primary open angle glaucoma need lifelong treatment. It possess financial burden to patient. We have done this study to compare the monthly cost and cost effectiveness of brimonidine /timolol fixed combi-nation and Travoprost 0.004% eye drops in patients of primary open angle glaucoma. Methods: Drops were dispensed at room temperature from 2.5-mL bottles of Travoprost, and 5ml of Brimonidine/Timolol. Two determinations of drop count were taken, each made from bottles held vertically and at a 45-degree angle. The total volumes of medication dispensed from each bottle were measured. Drops in five new bottles were counted and averaged for each drug. Drugs given to patients and asked them to come back with empty bottles for follow up after 2, 4, 8, 12 wks. IOP was measured and another bottle of drug is given. Average retail price was determined by survey of different brands available in market. Drop count, average retail price, and IOP reduction data were used to compute annual cost and cost effectiveness (annual cost per mmHg of IOP reduction) of both of the drugs. Results: Drops per 2.5ml bottle averaged 83 for Travoprost 0.004% and 100 drops per 5ml bottle for Brimonidine/Timolol. Average retail cost per bottle was 498 for Travoprost 0.004% and 204 for Brimonidine/Timolol. Annual re-tail cost was 3545 for Brimonidine/Timolol and 4910 for Travoprost 0.004%. Cost effectiveness ranges were 328 to 361 for Brimoni-dine/Timolol and 629 to 637 for Travoprost 0.004%. Conclusions: Brimonidine/Timolol had the lower monthly cost and annual cost and it is more cost effective than Travoprost 0.004%. |
| Databáze: |
OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
