Treating 1,000 patients with the LMWH strategy as compared with the UH/LMWH strategy would result in 10 fewer cases of recurrent thrombosis, 1.2 fewer deaths, at an additional cost of $96,822; the cost-effectiveness ratio was $9,667 and $80,685 per recurrent thrombosis or death prevented, respectively.

2014年12月16日 · In this study, the median cost of LMWH for all countries was $8 (and $24.34 in the U.S.) compared to just $3.29 (and $3.23 in the U.S.) for UFH. However, differences in the clinical effects of LMWH and UFH may influence downstream costs.

The cost to treat one inpatient was $2993 for LMWH and $3048 for UFH. Even more would be saved if LMWH was delivered on an outpatient basis (cost of $1641 per patient). The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that LMWH in any treatment setting is …

LMWHs have a clinical advantage over UFH in terms of a lower risk of major bleeding, lower recurrence of VTE, and lower mortality rates.5,7-9 However, drug acquisition costs per day for LMWH is about three times the acquisition costs for UFH [C$12.08/day for LMWH versus C$4.14/day for UFH (values in 2007)].10,11 Since UFH is inexpensive relative...

The difference in cost was driven primarily by the increased occurrence and attendant cost of major bleeding associated with LMWH, in addition to the slightly higher drug acquisition cost of LMWH. The incremental cost and cost-effectiveness of VTE prevention is presented in Table 18, with disaggregated costs in Table 19.

A multicenter blinded, randomized trial compared the effectiveness of the most common pharmocoprevention strategies, unfractionated heparin (UFH) and the low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) dalteparin, finding no difference in the primary end point of leg deep-vein thrombosis but a reduced rate of pulmonary embolus and heparin-induced ...

Unfractionated heparin (UFH) and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) are among the medications used for preventing blood coagulation. This study was carried out aiming at analyzing the cost effectiveness of LMWH versus UFH in hospitalized patients with stroke due to AF with respect to the Iranian population.

2005年9月1日 · LMWH became cost-saving if the daily pharmacy costs for LMWH were <$51, if ≥ 8% of patients were eligible for early discharge, or if ≥ 5% of patients could be treated entirely as outpatients. For inpatient treatment of PE, the use of LMWH is cost-effective compared to UFH.

Intravenous unfractionated heparin (UH), LMWH (40% at home, 60% in hospital), or selective UH/LMWH (UH for hospitalized patients and LMWH for patients treated at home). The outcomes were recurrent thrombosis, mortality, direct medical costs, and marginal cost-effectiveness ratios from the payer's perspective.

2004年12月14日 · The LMWH regimen was less expensive overall as well ($9197 for LMWH versus $11 598 for warfarin; the cost of INR measurement was included in the cost for warfarin). The authors also calculated the cost of delivering the 2 …