Cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to primary care for influenza-like-illness: economic evaluation alongside the randomised controlled ALIC4E trial in 15 European countries.

BACKGROUND: Oseltamivir is usually not often prescribed (or reimbursed) for non-high-risk patients consulting for influenza-like-illness (ILI) in primary care in Europe. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to usual primary care in adults/adolescents (13 years +) and children with ILI during seasonal influenza epidemics, using data collected in an open-label, multi-season, randomised controlled trial of oseltamivir in 15 European countries. METHODS: Direct and indirect cost estimates were based on patient reported resource use and official country-specific unit costs. Health-Related Quality of Life was assessed by EQ-5D questionnaires. Costs and quality adjusted life-years (QALY) were bootstrapped (N = 10,000) to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), from both the healthcare payers' and the societal perspectives, with uncertainty expressed through probabilistic sensitivity analysis and expected value for perfect information (EVPI) analysis. Additionally, scenario (self-reported spending), comorbidities subgroup and country-specific analyses were performed. RESULTS: The healthcare payers' expected ICERs of oseltamivir were €22,459 per QALY gained in adults/adolescents and €13,001 in children. From the societal perspective, oseltamivir was cost-saving in adults/adolescents, but the ICER is €8,344 in children. Large uncertainties were observed in subgroups with comorbidities, especially for children. The expected ICERs and extent of decision uncertainty varied between countries (EVPI ranged €1-€35 per patient). CONCLUSION: Adding oseltamivir to primary usual care in Europe is likely to be cost-effective for treating adults/adolescents and children with ILI from the healthcare payers' perspective (if willingness-to-pay per QALY gained > €22,459) and cost-saving in adults/adolescents from a societal perspective.

Impact of Adding Oseltamivir to Usual Care on Quality-Adjusted Life-Years During Influenza-Like Illness.

OBJECTIVES: The ALIC4E trial has shown that oseltamivir reduces recovery time while increasing the risk of nausea. This secondary analysis of the ALIC4E trial aimed to determine the gain in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with adding oseltamivir to usual primary care in patients presenting with influenza-like illness (ILI). METHODS: Patients with ILI were recruited during the influenza season (2015-2018) in 15 European countries. Patients were assigned to usual care with or without oseltamivir through stratified randomization (age, severity, comorbidities, and symptom onset). Patients' health status was valued with the EQ-5D and visual analog scale (VAS) for up to 28 days. Average EQ-5D and VAS scores over time were estimated for both treatment groups using one-inflated beta regression in children (<13 years old) and adults (≥13 years old). QALY gain was calculated as the difference between the groups. Sensitivity analysis considered the value set to convert EQ-5D answers to summary scores and the follow-up period. RESULTS: In adults, oseltamivir gained 0.0006 (95% confidence interval 0.0002-0.0010) QALYs, whereas no statistically significant gain was found in children (14-day follow-up, EQ-5D). QALY gains were statistically significant in patients aged ≥65 years, patients without relevant comorbidities, or patients experiencing symptoms for ≤48 hours. Using VAS and accounting for 28-day follow-up resulted in higher QALY gain. CONCLUSIONS: QALY gain owing to oseltamivir is limited compared with other diseases, and its clinical meaningfulness remains to be determined. Further analysis is needed to evaluate whether QALY gain and its impact on ILI treatment cost render oseltamivir cost-effective.

Direct and Indirect Costs of Influenza-Like Illness Treated with and Without Oseltamivir in 15 European Countries: A Descriptive Analysis Alongside the Randomised Controlled ALIC4E Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Influenza-like illness (ILI) leads to a substantial disease burden every winter in Europe; however, oseltamivir is not frequently prescribed to ILI patients in the primary-care setting. An open-label, multi-country, multi-season, randomised controlled trial investigated the effectiveness of oseltamivir for treating ILI in 15 European countries. We aimed to evaluate whether patients presenting with ILI in primary care and being managed with the addition of oseltamivir to usual care had lower average direct and indirect costs compared to patients with usual care alone. METHODS: Resource use data were extracted from participants' daily diaries. Itemised country-specific unit costs were collected through official tariffs, pharmacies or literature. Costs were converted to 2018 values. The null hypothesis was tested based on one-sided credible intervals (CrIs) obtained by bootstrapping. Base-case analysis estimated direct cost and productivity losses using itemised costed resource use and the human capital approach. Scenario analyses with self-reported spending rather than itemised costing were also performed. RESULTS: Patients receiving oseltamivir (N = 1306) reported fewer healthcare visits, medication uses, hospital attendances and paid-work hours lost than the other patients (N = 1298). Excluding the oseltamivir cost, the average direct costs were lower in patients treated with oseltamivir from all perspectives, but these differences were not statistically significant (perspective of patient: €17 [0-95% Crl: 16-19] vs. €24 [5-100% Crl: 18-29]; healthcare provider: €37 [28-67] vs. €44 [25-55]; healthcare payers: €54 [45-85] vs. €68 [45-81]; and society: €423 [399-478] vs. €451 [390-478]). Scenario and age-group analyses confirmed these findings, but with some between-country differences. CONCLUSION: The average direct and indirect costs were consistently lower in patients treated with oseltamivir than in patients without from four perspectives (excluding the oseltamivir cost). However, these differences were not statistically significant.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a GP- and parent-directed intervention to reduce antibiotic prescribing for children with respiratory tract infections in primary care.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated costs and effects of the RAAK (RAtional Antibiotic use Kids) intervention (GP online training and information booklets for parents), aiming to reduce antibiotic prescribing for children with respiratory tract infection (RTI). METHODS: We conducted a trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis from a societal perspective. We included children consulting the GP with RTI for whom parents kept a 2 week (cost) diary. The antibiotic prescribing rate was the percentage of children receiving an antibiotic prescription at the index consultation and during the 2 weeks of follow-up. The cost difference between the intervention and usual care groups per percentage decrease in antibiotic prescribing was calculated. Bootstrapping was used to assess uncertainty surrounding the outcomes. RESULTS: Costs and effects of 153 children in the intervention group and 107 children in the usual care group were available for analysis. Antibiotic prescribing was 12% lower in the intervention group and costs were €10.27 higher in the intervention group compared with the usual care group. This resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €0.85 per percentage decrease in antibiotic prescribing. The probability that the intervention was more effective, but more expensive, was 53%, whereas the probability that the intervention was more effective and less expensive compared with usual care was 41%. CONCLUSIONS: The online training for GPs and the information booklet for parents resulted in a decrease in antibiotic prescribing in children with RTI, at very low cost, and should therefore be considered for implementation in primary care.

Antivirals for influenza-Like Illness? A randomised Controlled trial of Clinical and Cost effectiveness in primary CarE (ALIC4 E): the ALIC4 E protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Effective management of seasonal and pandemic influenza is a high priority internationally. Guidelines in many countries recommend antiviral treatment for older people and individuals with comorbidity at increased risk of complications. However, antivirals are not often prescribed in primary care in Europe, partly because its clinical and cost effectiveness has been insufficiently demonstrated by non-industry funded and pragmatic studies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Antivirals for influenza-Like Illness? An rCt of Clinical and Cost effectiveness in primary CarE is a European multinational, multicentre, open-labelled, non-industry funded, pragmatic, adaptive-platform, randomised controlled trial. Initial trial arms will be best usual primary care and best usual primary care plus treatment with oseltamivir for 5 days. We aim to recruit at least 2500 participants ≥1 year presenting with influenza-like illness (ILI), with symptom duration ≤72 hours in primary care over three consecutive periods of confirmed high influenza incidence. Participant outcomes will be followed up to 28 days by diary and telephone. The primary objective is to determine whether adding antiviral treatment to best usual primary care is effective in reducing time to return to usual daily activity with fever, headache and muscle ache reduced to minor severity or less. Secondary objectives include estimating cost-effectiveness, benefits in subgroups according to age (<12, 12-64 and >64 years), severity of symptoms at presentation (low, medium and high), comorbidity (yes/no), duration of symptoms (≤48 hours/>48-72 hours), complications (hospital admission and pneumonia), use of additional prescribed medication including antibiotics, use of over-the-counter medicines and self-management of ILI symptoms. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics committee (REC) approval was granted by the NRES Committee South Central (Oxford B) and Clinical Trial Authority (CTA) approval by The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. All participating countries gained national REC and CTA approval as required. Dissemination of results will be through peer-reviewed scientific journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN27908921; Pre-results.

Inappropriate antibiotic prescription for respiratory tract indications: most prominent in adult patients.

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies suggest overprescribing of antibiotics for respiratory tract indications (RTIs), without really authenticating inappropriate prescription; the strict criteria of guideline recommendations were not taken into account as information on specific diagnoses, patient characteristics and disease severity was not available. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to quantify and qualify inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for RTIs. METHODS: This is an observational study of the (antibiotic) management of patients with RTIs, using a detailed registration of RTI consultations by general practitioners (GPs). Consultations of which all necessary information was available were benchmarked to the prescribing guidelines for acute otitis media (AOM), acute sore throat, rhinosinusitis or acute cough. Levels of overprescribing for these indications and factors associated with overprescribing were determined. RESULTS: The overall antibiotic prescribing rate was 38%. Of these prescriptions, 46% were not indicated by the guidelines. Relative overprescribing was highest for throat (including tonsillitis) and lowest for ear consultations (including AOM). Absolute overprescribing was highest for lower RTIs (including bronchitis). Overprescribing was highest for patients between 18 and 65 years of age, when GPs felt patients' pressure for an antibiotic treatment, for patients presenting with fever and with complaints longer than 1 week. Underprescribing was observed in <4% of the consultations without a prescription. CONCLUSION: Awareness of indications and patient groups provoking antibiotic overprescribing can help in the development of targeted strategies to improve GPs' prescribing routines for RTIs.