Medical Journal of The Islamic Republic of Iran (MJIRI)
Iran University of Medical Sciences
Sat, Jul 27, 2024
[Archive]
Volume 36, Issue 1 (1-2022)
Med J Islam Repub Iran 2022 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Souresrafil A, Abutorabi A, Peighambari M M, Noohi F, Haghjoo M. Cost-effectiveness of New Oral Anticoagulants for the Prevention of Stroke in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation in Low and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review. Med J Islam Repub Iran 2022; 36 (1) :47-60
URL: http://mjiri.iums.ac.ir/article-1-7590-en.html
URL: http://mjiri.iums.ac.ir/article-1-7590-en.html
Department of Health Economics, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , abutorabi.a@iums.ac.ir
Abstract: (1556 Views)
Background: Low- and middle-income (LMICs) countries are facing with a high incidence of cardiovascular diseases and limited resources for confronting these diseases. Atrial fibrillation(AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in the world that is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This study assessed cost-effectiveness studies of novel oral anticoagulants(NOACs) compared to Warfarin for the prevention of stroke in patients with AF in LMICs.
Methods: In this systematic review study, electronic databases were searched for economic evaluation studies about NOACs cost-effectiveness conducted in LMICs between 2008 and 2019. The selection of studies for review was also based on the PICO (population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes) guidelines. In this study, the population was restricted to patients with atrial fibrillation living in LMICs. We identified three types of drugs (apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and edoxaban) as interventions and warfarin as the comparison therapy. Quality of Health Economic Studies checklist was used to evaluate the quality of the included articles.
Results: Sixteen articles were extracted, including four cost-effectiveness analyses and two cost-utility analyses. QHES scores ranged from 58 to 87.5 out of a possible 100 points, with a mean score of 77.34. The results of the study showed that from a social perspective, Edoxaban is the most cost-effective therapeutic option compared to warfarin and other NOACs, but Warfarin was much more cost-effective than Rivaroxaban and Apixaban. Furthermore, NOACs were more cost-effective than warfarin from the payer perspective, but from the health system perspective, all NOACs were dominated by warfarin.
Conclusion: The present systematic review demonstrates that from a social perspective, Edoxaban is the optimal alternative to warfarin other NOACs for stroke prevention in patients with AF in (LMICs). one study was found on the economic evaluation of NOACs and warfarin in patients with AF in low-income countries, so further research on the economic evaluation of these drugs is recommended.
Methods: In this systematic review study, electronic databases were searched for economic evaluation studies about NOACs cost-effectiveness conducted in LMICs between 2008 and 2019. The selection of studies for review was also based on the PICO (population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes) guidelines. In this study, the population was restricted to patients with atrial fibrillation living in LMICs. We identified three types of drugs (apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and edoxaban) as interventions and warfarin as the comparison therapy. Quality of Health Economic Studies checklist was used to evaluate the quality of the included articles.
Results: Sixteen articles were extracted, including four cost-effectiveness analyses and two cost-utility analyses. QHES scores ranged from 58 to 87.5 out of a possible 100 points, with a mean score of 77.34. The results of the study showed that from a social perspective, Edoxaban is the most cost-effective therapeutic option compared to warfarin and other NOACs, but Warfarin was much more cost-effective than Rivaroxaban and Apixaban. Furthermore, NOACs were more cost-effective than warfarin from the payer perspective, but from the health system perspective, all NOACs were dominated by warfarin.
Conclusion: The present systematic review demonstrates that from a social perspective, Edoxaban is the optimal alternative to warfarin other NOACs for stroke prevention in patients with AF in (LMICs). one study was found on the economic evaluation of NOACs and warfarin in patients with AF in low-income countries, so further research on the economic evaluation of these drugs is recommended.
Type of Study: Systematic Review |
Subject:
Health Management and Economics
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
