|
|
|
|
||
|
||
|
|
||
| SEARCH | SUBSCRIBE | ||
|
 |
Treating Elderly Flu Sufferers Worth the Cost Reuters
Health, September 1, 2003 NEW
YORK (Reuters Health) - Treating people in their 60s and 70s who have the
flu with anti-flu drugs is worth the cost, but preventing flu with an
annual flu shot is a better strategy, according to a report released
Monday Researchers
know that treating younger adults with anti-flu drugs is worthwhile from
an economic angle because it cuts time off the job, but until now it was
not known whether treating elderly flu sufferers would be worth it. Dr.
Michael B. Rothberg of Baystate Medical Center in Springfield,
Massachusetts, and colleagues used published information and computer
models to compare the costs of a variety of strategies for dealing with
flu in the young and old. As
they report in the Annals of Internal Medicine, they found that it is
cost-effective to treat people older than age 65 who had not been
vaccinated or who were at high risk for complications due to flu with the
anti-flu drug oseltamivir (Tamiflu) without first testing for flu. For
vaccinated or low-risk patients, it's best to test for flu first and then
treat with oseltamivir if the test is positive, according to the
researchers. Oseltamivir
has fewer side effects than amantadine, another drug used to treat flu,
and is effective against both type A and type B influenza. However,
amantadine is a cost- effective alternative for people who have no
prescription drug benefits, they say. Frail
elderly individuals should avoid amantadine, especially if they have heart
failure or kidney problems, the researchers say. They also say that
rimantadine, another treatment for flu, is not cost-effective under any
circumstances, largely because it is less effective than the other agents.
Copyright
© 2002 Global Action on Aging
|
