Allergy immunotherapy among Medicaid-enrolled children with allergic rhinitis: Patterns of care, resource use, and costs

BioMedEcon, LLC, PO Box 129, Moss Beach, CA 94038, USA.
The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology (Impact Factor: 11.25). 02/2008; 121(1):227-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2007.10.026
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Although research demonstrates that allergy immunotherapy (IT) improves allergic rhinitis (AR) outcomes, little is known about IT patterns of care and associated resource use and costs among US children with diagnoses of AR.
We sought to examine characteristics associated with receiving IT, patterns of IT care, and health care use and costs incurred in the 6 months before versus after IT.
We performed retrospective Florida Medicaid claims data (1997-2004) analysis of children (<18 years of age) given new diagnoses of AR.
Of 102,390 patients with new diagnoses of AR, 3048 (3.0%) received IT. Male patients, Hispanic patients, and those with concomitant asthma were significantly more likely to receive IT. Approximately 53% completed less than 1 year and 84% completed less than 3 years of IT. Patients who received IT used significantly less pharmacy (12.1 vs 8.9 claims, P < .0001), outpatient (30.7 vs 22.9 visits, P < .0001), and inpatient (1.2 vs 0.4 admissions, P = .02) resources in the 6 months after versus before IT. Pharmacy ($330 vs $60, P < .0001), outpatient ($735 vs $270, P < .0001), and inpatient ($2441 vs $1, P < .0001) costs (including costs for IT care) were significantly reduced after IT.
Despite suboptimal treatment persistence (only 16% of patients completed 3 years of IT), resource use and costs after treatment were significantly reduced from pre-IT levels.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Given the widespread prevalence of allergic disease, its substantially associated clinical and economic burden, the unique disease-modifying benefits of allergy immunotherapy (AIT), and increased availability of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), a critical update of the evidence for AIT-related cost savings [for both subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and SLIT] is particularly relevant and timely. The present article reviews the evidence for SCIT-related and SLIT-related cost savings derived from a systematic review of the published literature.
    Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology 06/2014; DOI:10.1097/ACI.0000000000000084 · 3.66 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Allergen immunotherapy is the sole treatment for IgE-mediated allergic diseases directed at the underlying mechanism. The two widely accepted administration routes are sublingual (SLIT) and subcutaneous (SCIT). We reviewed how patients should best be selected for immunotherapy and how the optimal administration route can be defined. Before deciding SCIT or SLIT, appropriate selection of patients for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is mandatory. To be eligible for AIT, subjects must have a clear medical history of allergic disease, with exacerbation of symptoms on exposure to one or more allergens and a corresponding positive skin or in vitro test. Then the route of administration should be based on: published evidence of clinical and immunologic efficacy (which varies per allergic disease and per allergen); mono- or multi-allergen immunotherapy, for SLIT multi-allergen immunotherapy was not effective; safety: adverse events with SLIT are more frequent, but less severe; and, costs and patient preferences, closely related to adherence issues. All these are discussed in the article.
    Immunotherapy 07/2014; 6(7):871-884. DOI:10.2217/imt.14.55 · 2.44 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is an at-home, self-administered, long-term therapy. As with other chronic diseases, patient adherence is a prerequisite for the success of SLIT. Its ease of intake and convenience should ensure adequate patient compliance; however, a recent post-marketing manufacturers' survey has shown a very high rate of discontinuation. The available literature on patient adherence to SLIT is reviewed in the present article. Great differences exist between controlled studies, which show a satisfactory adherence rate, and long-term real life studies, which show poor compliance with SLIT. Remarkable divergence in the weight placed on different reasons for SLIT discontinuation is reported in the various studies. The main reasons for withdrawal are analysed and discussed. Data from placebo-controlled studies demonstrate that adherence depends less on the patient's perception of the inefficacy of therapy or other causes than on the patient's motivation; that is, the patient's decision to participate in the trial and to meet the researcher's expectations. The enrolment of patients who agree to enter a blind, placebo-controlled trial is conceptually similar to a concordance process. Concordance is a consultation process that aims to establish a therapeutic alliance between the physician and patient and to bring about agreement on a therapeutic program. Concordance is based on the patient's beliefs and needs and implies actions that support patient adherence. Suggestions are given for a SLIT management strategy based on the concordance process and designed to integrate patient viewpoints into treatment-related decisions and to meet patients' preferences and their health system-related needs. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
    Clinical & Experimental Allergy 06/2014; 44(11). DOI:10.1111/cea.12362 · 4.32 Impact Factor