• Health Policy and Management
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.96-116
• /
• 2006

To assess the economic value of pharmaceutical therapy with Kremezin, we investigated the maximum amount of willingness-to-pay (WTP) of patients with chronic renal failure (CRF) for a hypothetical effect of Kremezin in delaying the initiation of dialysis treatments. A face-to-face survey was carried out in a sample of 141 CRF patients from 2 dialysis centers, composed of 82 hemodialysis patients, 38 peritoneal dialysis patients, and 21 non-dialysis CRF patients. Using a bidding game method with a starting point of 320,000 Won, which is the average monthly out-of-pocket payment for dialysis treatment, we asked the study subjects how much they would pay per month to receive Kremezin therapy. The mean out-of-pocket monthly WTP for Kremezin was 310,000, 430,000, and 520,000 Won (p<0.05, repeated one-way ANOVA)) when Kremezin delays the initiation of dialysis treatments by 1, 2, and 4 years. Significant correlation between the respondent's WTP and income $(r=0.266{\sim}0.368,\;p<0.05)$ confirmed the construct validity of the WTP instrument. Regression results showed that patients with a higher education, with diabetes as a major causes of CRF, and undergoing hemodialysis treatments tended to express higher WTP for Kremezin. The economic value of WTP from the perspective of patients varied from 310,000 to 520,000 Won depending on the effect size of Kremezin. The mean WTP was higher than 32,000 Won, only when the hypothetical effect of Kremezin in delaying the initiation of dialysis is for 2 years. This implies that Kremezin might be the preferred choice of therapy by CRF patients if it delays the initiation of dialysis treatment for at least 2 years.

• Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health
• /
• v.39 no.2
• /
• pp.149-158
• /
• 2006

Objectives : We wanted to evaluate the economic value of a pharmaceutical product, Kremezin, for treating patients with chronic renal failure (CRF) by estimating the amount of cost savings due to its effect for delaying the initiation of dialysis treatments. Methods : We defined a conventional treatment for CRF accompanied by Kremezin therapy as 'the treatment group' and only conventional treatment as 'the alternative group.' The types of costs included were direct medical and nonmedical costs and costs of productivity loss. The information on the effect of Kremezin was obtained from the results of earlier clinical studies. Cost information was derived from the administrative data for 20 hemodialysis and 20 peritoneal dialysis patients from one tertiary care hospital, and also from the administrative data of 10 hemodialysis patients from one free-standing dialysis center. Per-capita cost savings resulting from Kremezin therapy were separately estimated for the cases with delay for the onset of hemodialysis and the cases with immediate performance of peritoneal dialysis. By computing the weighted average for the cases of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, the expected per-capita cost savings of a patient with CRF was obtained. Using a discount rate of 5%, future cost savings were converted to the present value. Results : The present value of cumulative cost savings per patient with CRF from the societal perspective would be $18,555,000{\sim}29,410,000$ Won or $72,104,000{\sim}112,523,000$ Won if Kremezin delays the initiation of dialysis by 1 or 4 years. Conclusions : The estimated amount of cost savings resulting from treating CRF patients with Kremezin confirms that its effect for delaying the onset of dialysis treatments has a considerable economic value.