| Title |
Relative cost-effectiveness of using an extensively hydrolyzed casein formula containing the probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG in managing infants with cow's milk allergy in Poland
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ceor.s105748 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Julian F Guest, Diana Weidlich, Maciej Kaczmarski, Elzbieta Jarocka-Cyrta, Natalia Kobelska-Dubiel, Agnieszka Krauze, Iwona Sakowska-Maliszewska, Anna Zawadzka-Krajewska |
| Abstract |
To estimate the cost-effectiveness of using an extensively hydrolyzed casein formula (eHCF) containing the probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (eHCF + LGG; Nutramigen LGG) as an initial treatment for cow's milk allergy compared with eHCF alone and amino acid formulas (AAF) in Poland from the perspective of the Polish National Health Fund (Narodowy Fundusz Zdrowia [NFZ]) and parents. Decision modeling was used to estimate the probability of cow's milk allergic infants developing tolerance to cow's milk by 18 months. The model also estimated the cost to the NFZ and parents (Polish Zloty [PLN] at 2013-2014 prices) for managing infants over 18 months after starting one of the formulas as well as the relative cost-effectiveness of each of the formulas. The probability of developing tolerance to cow's milk by 18 months was higher among infants who were fed eHCF + LGG (0.82) compared with those fed eHCF alone (0.53) or an AAF (0.22). An infant who is initially managed with eHCF + LGG is expected to consume fewer health care resources than infants managed with the other formulas. Hence, the estimated total health care cost incurred by the NFZ for initially feeding infants with eHCF + LGG (PLN 5,693) was less than that of feeding infants with eHCF alone (PLN 7,749) or an AAF (PLN 24,333). However, the total cost incurred by parents for initially feeding infants with an AAF (PLN 815) was marginally less than that of feeding with eHCF + LGG (PLN 993), which was less than that of feeding with eHCF alone (PLN 1,226). Using eHCF + LGG instead of eHCF alone or an AAF for first-line management of newly diagnosed infants with cow's milk allergy affords a cost-effective use of NFZ-funded resources, since it improves outcome for less cost. Whether eHCF + LGG would be viewed as being cost-effective by parents is dependent on their willingness to pay an additional cost for additional tolerance acquisition to cow's milk. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 26 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 19% |
| Researcher | 5 | 19% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 9 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 June 2016.
All research outputs
#20,723,696
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#445
of 525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,136
of 353,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#24
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 353,828 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.