“COST EFFECTIVENESS COMPARISON OF LONG-ACTING MUSCARINIC ANTAGONISTS (LAMA) ADDED TO COMBINATION LONG-ACTING BETAAGONISTS AND INHALED CORTICOSTEROIDS (LABA/ICS) [TRIPLETHERAPY] V/S LABA/ICS [DUAL THERAPY] IN MODERATE TO SEVERE ASTHMA”

Abstract

Background: Frequent exacerbations raise the risk of persistent asthma in adults and contribute to high treatment costs. Thus, the main goals of asthma management, are to reduce the rate of exacerbations, to achieve asthma control and from an economic perspective to reduce the burden of this disease through maximizing health gain with available resources. This study compares the costs and effectiveness of dual and triple therapy to achieve a better asthma control and good quality of life (QOL) at a lower cost. A prospective observational comparative stu Methods: dy conducted at a hospital on 80 asthma patients, out of which 40 received dual and the other 40 received triple therapy. All subjects completed the Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (MAQLQ) and Asthma Control Test (ACT) at baseline and after 2 and 4 weeks, respectively, of follow- up visits. The mean of post FEV1 and PEFR between dual therapy (69.0 Results: 25±15.7 and 61.95±13.6 respectively) and triple therapy (73.925±11.5 and 69.725±9.2) showed signicant improvement in lung function with triple therapy. At week 4, in dual therapy and triple therapy mean change from baseline in total ACT Score was 3.55±0.006 (P<0.05) to 4.675±0.49 (P <0.05) respectively and at week 2, in dual therapy and triple therapy mean change from baseline in MAQLQ score was 0.237±-0.03 (P<0.05) to 0.255±-0.005 (P<0.05) respectively. Triple therapy is more cost-effective than Conclusion: dual therapy to treat adults with moderate to severe asthma who are symptomatic despite current doses. In addition, it can improve QOL and better control of asthma.