ArticlePharmacoEconomics2002
The cost to the United Kingdom National Health Service of managing erectile dysfunction: the impact of sildenafil and prescribing restrictions.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The invisible costs of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA): Systematic review and cost-of-illness analysis.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- Ginseng for erectile dysfunction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Increasing access to erectile dysfunction treatment via pharmacies to improve healthcare provider visits and quality of life: Results from a prospective real-world observational study in the United Kingdom.International journal of clinical practice · 2021Observational
- The cost-utility of open prostatectomy compared with active surveillance in early localised prostate cancer.BMC health services research · 2014Article
- Smoking and erectile dysfunction: findings from a representative sample of Australian men.Tobacco control · 2006Article
- Impact of introduction of sildenafil on other treatment modalities for erectile dysfunction: a study of nationwide and local hospital sales.International journal of impotence research · 2004Article
- Patterns of use of sildenafil among commercially insured adults in the United States: 1998-2002.International journal of impotence research · 2004Article
- The role of the 'lifestyle' label and negative bias in the allocation of health resources for erectile dysfunction drugs: an ethics-based appraisal.International journal of impotence researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo estimate the annual direct cost of managing erectile dysfunction (ED) to the UK National Health Service (NHS) and to examine the impact of the introduction of sildenafil in 1998 and Schedule 11 restrictions in 1999.
designA prevalence-based cost-of-illness approach was used. The period 1997 to 2000 was covered. The numbers of ED prescriptions, prosthesis implantations and general practitioner (GP) consultations were retrieved retrospectively from UK resource utilisation databases. The number of specialist consultations and psychosexual therapy sessions were estimated from NHS clinic data. National resource unit costs were applied. MAIN OUTCOMES AND
resultsBetween 1997 and 2000 the number of men presenting with ED increased from 79,800 to 257,984. The cost to the NHS increased from pounds sterling 29.4 million to pounds sterling 73.8 million (2000 estimates). The cost per patient fell from pounds sterling 368 to pounds sterling 286. In 1997, most NHS costs came from psychosexual therapy (30.7%), specialist consultations (20.2%) and intracavernosal injections (26.6%). By 2000, NHS costs came primarily from specialist consultations (32.0%), sildenafil prescriptions (26.2%), psychosexual therapy (13.6%) and GP consultations (12.0%). The annual cost was most sensitive to the number of drug prescriptions and specialist consultations.
conclusionsThe increased NHS cost of managing ED was due mainly to a three-fold increase in the number of men presenting to GPs, substantial numbers of whom were then referred for specialist consultations under Schedule 11 restrictions. This naturally resulted in the increased use of all resources including sildenafil. The cost effectiveness of transferring prescribing responsibility in cases of severe distress from specialists to GPs in primary care remains to be determined.
Indexed as
Identifiers
12381240What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.