Why the study?
Does enoxaparin 30 mg every 12 h provide cost-effective thromboembolic prophylaxis in trauma patients compared to no prophylaxis?
Does enoxaparin 30 mg every 12 h provide cost-effective thromboembolic prophylaxis in trauma patients compared to no prophylaxis?
Enoxaparin prophylaxis in trauma patients incurs a modest cost per thromboembolic event avoided, which could become cost-saving under certain incidence or drug cost thresholds.
Supports consideration of enoxaparin prophylaxis in trauma at modest cost per event; leaves open real-world cost-effectiveness thresholds.
Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism are major risks in patients experiencing major trauma. Currently, the American College of Chest Physicians recommends low molecular weight heparin as prophylaxis in trauma patients with identifiable risk factors in the absence of contraindications. Enoxaparin is the only low molecular weight heparin available in the US that has been evaluated to date in this indication. The purpose of this study was to perform incremental cost-effectiveness ratio calculations for enoxaparin versus no prophylaxis as thromboembolic prophylaxis in trauma patients. These calculations demonstrate that a cost of $279.43 would be incurred for each thromboembolic event avoided if enoxaparin 30 mg every 12 h were routinely used as prophylaxis in this population, compared with no prophylaxis. Sensitivity analyses demonstrate that if the incidence of proximal vein thrombosis in patients prophylaxed with enoxaparin approached 1.8%, if the actual rate of these thrombi exceeded 19.4% in untreated patients, or if the cost of the drug was decreased to $15.25 per dose, a cost saving would be experienced in routine prophylaxis with this agent.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wade et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: