Clinical practice of BOTOX® treatment for overactive bladder syndrome in Sweden: an assessment of resource use and external validity

• Published in: Scandinavian journal of urology Vol. 51; no. 5; pp. 397 - 401
• Main Authors: Gralén, Katarina, Elmér, Caroline, Broström, Eva, Althin, Rikard, Malmberg, Lars
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Taylor & Francis 03.09.2017
• Subjects: Acetylcholine Release Inhibitors - economics; Acetylcholine Release Inhibitors - therapeutic use; Aged; Botulinum toxin type A; Botulinum Toxins, Type A - economics; Botulinum Toxins, Type A - therapeutic use; Clinical Medicine; external validity; Female; Health Resources - utilization; Humans; Klinisk medicin; Male; Medical and Health Sciences; Medicin och hälsovetenskap; Middle Aged; overactive bladder syndrome; resource use; Retrospective Studies; Severity of Illness Index; Sweden; Syndrome; Urinary Bladder, Overactive - drug therapy; Urinary Bladder, Overactive - economics; Urinary Incontinence, Urge - drug therapy; Urinary Incontinence, Urge - economics; Urologi och njurmedicin; Urology and Nephrology; resource use; Botulinum toxin type A; overactive bladder syndrome; external validity
• DOI: 10.1080/21681805.2017.1334697
• ISSN: 2168-1805

Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the resource use of treating overactive bladder (OAB) patients in real-world clinical practice and to evaluate whether there is external validity in the treatment of OAB in clinical practice. Materials and methods: The study included 55 patients suffering from OAB and treated with BOTOX ® at two Swedish clinics. The study was conducted as an anonymized retrospective chart review study. Results: The estimated yearly direct cost of BOTOX treatment was €902. The mean age of patients in the study was 60 years, and 85% were women. The severity of OAB before BOTOX treatment, given by the mean number of daily leakages, equalled 4.8. The median interval between treatments was 210 days. Conclusions: Patient characteristics in the real world were similar to those in the clinical trials, showing a high degree of external validity. Treatment intervals were longer in the real world than in clinical trials, indicating that treatment cost could be lower when patients are treated as observed in real-world clinical practice.