2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.09.2645
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Cerebrolysin In The Treatment of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Moderate and Severe Degrees of Severity In The Russian Federation

Abstract: A705of ischemic stroke moderate and severe degrees of severity using a drug cerebrolysin compared with standard therapy, cost-effectiveness ratios (CER) were obtained 419656 RUB (6920 EUR) and 563183 RUB (9287 EUR), respectively. ConClusions: The standard therapy in combination with drug cerebrolysin has a lower CER compared with standard therapy, therefore, it is a dominant technology from the perspective of the cost-effectiveness analysis.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Kulikov and Abdrashitova et al aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of Cerebrolysin against standard therapy for patients diagnosed with moderate or severe stroke. Based on the reported results, Cerebrolysin was the dominant therapy, as cost-effectiveness ratios (CER) were lower (EUR 6920) than standard therapy (EUR 9287) [ 55 ]. Kulikov and Abdrashitova et al have also been developing a complementary budget impact analysis (BIA) since 2015, which showed that Cerebrolysin has lower direct costs associated with medical care (inpatient and outpatient care, pharmacotherapy, emergency care and neurorehabilitation) and indirect costs (loss of productivity caused by sick leave, disability, and death).…”
Section: Cost-effectiveness Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Kulikov and Abdrashitova et al aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of Cerebrolysin against standard therapy for patients diagnosed with moderate or severe stroke. Based on the reported results, Cerebrolysin was the dominant therapy, as cost-effectiveness ratios (CER) were lower (EUR 6920) than standard therapy (EUR 9287) [ 55 ]. Kulikov and Abdrashitova et al have also been developing a complementary budget impact analysis (BIA) since 2015, which showed that Cerebrolysin has lower direct costs associated with medical care (inpatient and outpatient care, pharmacotherapy, emergency care and neurorehabilitation) and indirect costs (loss of productivity caused by sick leave, disability, and death).…”
Section: Cost-effectiveness Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While existing studies are scarce, there is a signal that Cerebrolysin is probably cost-effective, with the potential to reduce the economic burden on national budgets, both as standard treatments in patients with different levels of severity [ 55 , 56 ] or in combination with another pharmacological therapy (i.e., alteplase) [ 57 ] in countries with different types of health insurance [ 58 , 59 ].…”
Section: Cost-effectiveness Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Current findings also suggested that the effect of CH on neuroplasticity and nerve recovery was greater than that on neuroprotection, and might have the greatest impact in the rehabilitation stage (Mureșanu et al, 2022). In addition, there was a signal that CH had the potential to significantly reduce the economic burden of the national budget, which could be used as the standard treatment for patients with different severity, or combined with another drug treatment (Kulikov and Abdrashitova, 2015;Walter et al, 2015). In 2021, the guidelines of the European Academy of Neurology and European Federation of Neurorehabilitation Societies on drug support for early exercise rehabilitation after acute ischemic stroke recommended the use of two drugs, namely, CH and citalopram (Beghi et al, 2021;Mureșanu et al, 2022).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…croglial activation/neuroinflammation [12][13][14][15]. Additionally, it has been demonstrated to exhibit neurotrophic activity, promote neuronal sprouting, improve cellular survival and stimulate neurogenesis [16][17][18].…”
Section: Conclusion In Conclusion It Was Found That Pretreatment Withmentioning
confidence: 99%