Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Using an 11-year panel of 156 Norwegian and Swedish patients with severe haemophilia, and including retrospective case-book data from birth, we compared the differences in the haemophilia-related resource use between on-demand and prophylactic treatment. Patients treated on-demand had more surgery (arthrodeses, prostheses implantations and synovectomies) and more days lost from work. Median annual factor-concentrate consumption among adults (18+) was 211,000 IU interquartile range (IQR) 154,000-268,000 or 3,024 IU kg-1 year(-1) for patients on prophylactic treatment and 55,000 IU (IQR 28,000-91,000) for on-demand patients (780 IU kg(-1) year(-1)). This was partly explained by the fact that the median dose per kg body weight was twice as great 28, (IQR 24-32) for prophylaxis compared with 14 (IQR 12-16) for on-demand. Prescribed dose per kg body weight was found to be an important factor explaining the variation in total annual factor-concentrate consumption per patient for both types of treatment. Other variables included in the panel-data regression analysis were the number of weeks on secondary prophylaxis for on-demand patients and age, body weight and type of haemophilia for children (0-17 years) on prophylaxis. Differences were consistently substantial and will affect both costs and benefits of the two treatment strategies.
Carlsson et al. (Mon,) studied this question.