Volume 116, Issue 5 , Pages 1058-1063, November 2005
Cost-effectiveness of a home-based environmental intervention for inner-city children with asthma
Background
Exposure to indoor allergens contributes to increased asthma morbidity. The Inner-City Asthma Study, a randomized trial involving home environmental allergen and irritant remediation among children aged 6 through 11 years with moderate-to-severe asthma, successfully reduced asthma symptoms. A cost-effectiveness analysis can help stakeholders to evaluate the potential costs and benefits of adopting such a program.
Objective
We sought to assess the cost-effectiveness of the environmental intervention of the Inner-City Asthma Study.
Methods
Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for a 2-year study period were calculated. Health outcome was measured as symptom-free days. Resource use measures included ambulatory visits, hospitalizations, and pharmaceutical use. CIs were obtained by using bootstrapping.
Results
The intervention, which cost $1469 per family, led to statistically significant reductions in symptom days, unscheduled clinic visits, and use of β-agonist inhalers. Over the year of the intervention and a year of follow-up, the intervention cost was $27.57 per additional symptom-free day (95% CI, $7.46-$67.42). Subgroup analysis showed that targeting the intervention to selected high-risk subgroups did not reduce the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.
Conclusions
A targeted home-based environmental intervention improved health and reduced service use in inner-city children with moderate-to-severe asthma. The intervention is cost-effective when the aim is to reduce asthma symptom days and the associated costs.
Key words: Asthma, inner city, cost-effectiveness, asthma intervention, allergen mitigation
Abbreviations used: EC, Environmental counselor, HEPA, High-efficiency particulate air (filter), ICAS, Inner-City Asthma Study, ICER, Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, NCICAS, National Cooperative Inner-City Asthma Study, SFD, Symptom-free day
Supported by grants AI-39769, AI-39900, AI-39902, AI-39789, AI-39901, AI-39761, AI-39785, and AI-39776 from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, DHHS, and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, DHHS.Disclosure of potential conflict of interest: R. Gruchalla has consultant arrangements with the GSK Allergy Fellowship Grant Review Board; receives grants from the National Institutes of Health, ExxonMobil, and Foundation support; and is employed by the US Food and Drug Administration. M. Kattan is on the speakers' bureau for Astra-Zeneca. W. Morgan has consultant arrangements with Genentech Inc. All other authors—none disclosed.
PII: S0091-6749(05)01790-2
doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2005.07.032
© 2005 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Volume 116, Issue 5 , Pages 1058-1063, November 2005
