Incorporação de esomeprazol em um hospital universitário: uma análise de custo-minimização
Série temática: Avaliação de Tecnologias em Saúde Hospitalar (ATS-H)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.34019/1982-8047.2023.v49.42885Keywords:
Costs and costs analysis, Analysis of the budgetary therapeutic advances, Omeprazole, Esomeprazole, Drug administration routesAbstract
Introduction. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used in stress ulcer prophylaxis. Omeprazole is the most prescribed PPI in Brazil, but its conventional oral formulation is unsuitable for administration through a tube due to the risk of obstruction. The injectable presentation of omeprazole has a much higher cost than the oral formulation. Esomeprazole, composed of microgranules, is an alternative to injectable omeprazole as it can be administered through a tube and could potentially lead to a cost reduction. Objective. To analyze, through cost minimization, the financial impact of incorporating esomeprazole in a secondary university hospital. Material and Methods. A retrospective cross-sectional observational study was conducted to identify and analyze the consumption and cost related to the use of injectable omeprazole and esomeprazole in the years 2021 and 2022. Cost-minimization analysis was performed based on the collected data, to determine the financial impact after incorporating esomeprazole. Results. There was a 76.7% reduction in the consumption of injectable omeprazole in 2022. The cost-minimization analysis indicated a real cost of R$20,374.96 in 2022 for the 906 doses used during the period, of which 46.4% were injectable omeprazole and 53.6% were esomeprazole. Considering the scenario with exclusive therapy using injectable omeprazole, the simulated cost was R$41,252.05. The financial impact was R$-20,877.09, resulting in a resource savings of 50.6%. Conclusion. The incorporation of esomeprazole into the list of medications at a university hospital led to a significant cost reduction, resulting in over 50% savings in PPI consumption in the institution in 2022.
Downloads
References
Clarke K, Adler N, Agrawal D, Bhakta D, Sata SS, Singh S et al. Indications for the use of proton pump inhibitors for stress ulcer prophylaxis and peptic ulcer bleeding in hospitalized patients. Am J Med. 2022; 135(3):313-7. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2021.09.010
Alhujilan SS, Saeed MS, Abdulaziz Alalwan A. Assessment of adherence to the national stress ulcer prophylaxis guidelines: A cross-sectional analysis. Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal. 2023; 31(10):101754. doi: 10.1016/j.jsps.2023.101754
Gualberto FCM, Santos CR, Ferreira CRL, Costa JM. Análise farmacoeconômica do uso de omeprazol por idosos em uma das unidades básicas de saúde do Brasil. O Mundo da Saúde. 2023; 47(1). doi: 10.15343/0104-7809.202347e1452020P
Ponrouch MP, Sautou-Miranda V, Boyer A, Bourdeaux D, Montagner A, Chopineau J. Proton pump inhibitor administration via nasogastric tube in pediatric practice: comparative analysis with protocol optimization. Int J Pharm. 2010; 390(2):160-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2010.01.040
Messaouik D, Sautou-Miranda V, Bagel-Boithias S, Chopineau J. Comparative study and optimisation of the administration mode of three proton pump inhibitors by nasogastric tube. Int J Pharm. 2005; 299(1-2):65-72. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2005.04.034
Spezia IA, Matheus FC. Evaluation of prescription containing medication via enteral feeding tubes in an adult emergency unit. Revista Brasileira de Farmácia Hospitalar e Serviços de Saúde. 2020; 11(4):497. doi: 10.30968/rbfhss.2020.114.0497
Sankaranarayanan J, Reardon T, Olsen KM. Correlates and economic outcomes of proton pump inhibitor use by routes in intensive care unit patients. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014; 14(5):741-9. doi: 10.1586/14737167.2014.940902
Jin J, Huang C, Zhu C, Feng W, He A, Li T et al. Pharmacokinetics, bioequivalence, and safety of esomeprazole magnesium enteric‐coated capsules in healthy Chinese subjects. Clin Pharmacol Drug Dev. 2023; 12(7):691-8. doi: 10.1002/cpdd.1273
Ministério da Saúde (BR). Diretrizes metodológicas: análise de impacto orçamentário: manual para o sistema de saúde do Brasil [Internet]. 2012 [citado em 2023 Nov 12]. Disponível em: www.saude.gov.br.
Ministério da Saúde (BR). Secretaria de Ciência tecnologia e insumos estratégicos. Departamento de Ciência e Tecnologia. Diretrizes metodológicas: diretriz de avaliação econômica. 2. ed. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2014.
Ministério da Saúde (BR). Estudos de microcusteio aplicados a avaliações econômicas em saúde [Internet]. 2022 [citado em 2023 Nov 15].Disponível em: http://conitec.gov.br/.
Valizadeh Toosi SM, Elahi Vahed AR, Maleki I, Bari Z. Comparison of oral versus intravenous proton pump inhibitors in preventing re-bleeding from peptic ulcer after successful endoscopic therapy. Middle East J Dig Dis. 2018; 10(4):236-41. doi: 10.15171/mejdd.2018.116.
Tsoi KKF, Hirai HW, Sung JJY. Meta-analysis: comparison of oral vs. intravenous proton pump inhibitors in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2013; 38(7):721-8. doi: 10.1111/apt.12441
Yen HH, Yang CW, Su WW, Soon MS, Wu SS, Lin HJ. Oral versus intravenous proton pump inhibitors in preventing re-bleeding for patients with peptic ulcer bleeding after successful endoscopic therapy. BMC Gastroenterol. 2012; 12(1):66. doi: 10.1186/1471-230X-12-66
Mostaghni AA, Hashemi SA, Heydari ST. Comparison of oral and intravenous proton pump inhibitor on patients with high risk bleeding peptic ulcers: a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2011; 13(7):458-63. doi: 10.1016/S00165107(81)731560
Sung JJ, Suen BY, Wu JC, Lau JY, Ching JY, Lee VW, et al. Effects of intravenous and oral esomeprazole in the prevention of recurrent bleeding from peptic ulcers after endoscopic therapy. American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2014; 109(7):1005-10. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2014.105
Nasser SC, Nassif JG, Mahfouz F. Cost reduction associated with restriction policy on dispensing intravenous esomeprazole in lebanon. Pharmacy World & Science. 2010; 32(6):707-10. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v16.i8.982
Carmo TG, Silva DM, Carvalho CC, Figueiredo RM. Transição de via de linezolida endovenosa para via oral: uma análise de custo-minimização. J Bras Econ Saúde. 2022; 14:180-6. doi: 10.21115/JBES.v14.Suppl2.p180-6
Bao J, Zhou L, Xu M, Ma J. The impact of pharmacist intervention on the intravenous-to-oral switch therapy of proton pump inhibitors in cardiovascular surgery. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2023; 22(7):611-9. doi: 10.1080/14740338.2023.2172162
Akhloufi H, Hulscher M, Melles DC, Prins JM, van der Sijs H, Verbon A. Development of operationalized intravenous to oral antibiotic switch criteria. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 2017; 72(2):543-6. doi: 10.1093/jac/dky141
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Tatiane Garcia do Carmo Flausino, Fábio Ricardo Carrasco, Gerhard da Paz Lauterbach, Rosely Moralez Figueiredo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Cessão de Primeira Publicação à HU Revista
Os autores mantém todos os direitos autorais sobre a publicação, sem restrições, e concedem à HU Revista o direito de primeira publicação, com o trabalho licenciado sob a Licença Creative Commons Attribution que permite o compartilhamento irrestrito do trabalho, com reconhecimento da autoria e crédito pela citação de publicação inicial nesta revista, referenciando inclusive seu DOI.
