ArticleExperimental and clinical cardiology2006
Cost and utility of a low-molecular-weight heparin and unfractionated heparin for treatment of deep venous thrombosis in a Balkan country: A model analysis.
Article in Experimental and clinical cardiology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveLow-molecular-weight heparins are cost-saving for treating venous thrombosis in developed countries, but their cost-effectiveness in developing Balkan countries has not been investigated. The objective of the present study was to evaluate whether the results of cost-effectiveness studies of low-molecular-weight heparins versus unfractionated heparin for treatment of acute deep venous thrombosis conducted in a developed country are applicable to Serbian socioeconomic circumstances.
methodsA Markov model was constructed based on the decision model used by Gould et al (Ann Intern Med 1999;130:789-99), with the help of TreeAge Software (TreeAge Software Inc, USA). Probabilities for clinical outcomes were obtained from that study, while the costs were derived from the Serbian Republic Institute for Health Insurance and other sources. Patients with acute deep venous thrombosis, 60 years of age, were introduced into the model. A Monte Carlo microsimulation trial with 1000 patients was used for drawing conclusions from the model. The time horizon was six years, and the Serbian Republic Institute for Health Insurance was used.
resultsEnoxaparin for treatment of deep venous thrombosis in Serbian patients was not cost-saving, but was a cost-effective therapeutic strategy (from 5,322.97 CSD [Serbia and Montenegro dinars] per quality-adjusted life-year gained when used in out-patients, to 10,929.76 CSD per quality-adjusted life-year gained when used in inpatients). The drug acquisition cost was the major factor influencing the cost-effectiveness, due to the low cost of labour and hospitalization.
conclusionsThe results of pharmacoeconomic studies performed in developed countries cannot be directly extrapolated to developing Balkan countries. However, enoxaparin is still a cost-effective strategy for the treatment of deep venous thrombosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18651046PMC2274855W86419845What 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.