, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 373–386

Post-Exposure Influenza Prophylaxis with Oseltamivir

Cost Effectiveness and Cost Utility in Families in the UK
  • Beate Sander
  • Frederick G. Hayden
  • Marlene Gyldmark
  • Louis P. GarrisonJr
Original Research Article

DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200624040-00007

Cite this article as:
Sander, B., Hayden, F.G., Gyldmark, M. et al. Pharmacoeconomics (2006) 24: 373. doi:10.2165/00019053-200624040-00007


Objectives: To assess the cost effectiveness and cost utility of preventing postexposure influenza infection using the neuraminidase inhibitor oseltamivir from a healthcare payer’s perspective in the UK.

Methods: A simulation model was developed, based on clinical trial results and published data, to predict morbidity and mortality due to influenza and to compare oseltamivir post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) with no prophylaxis within families with members aged ≥13 years. Two scenarios were tested
  1. 1.

    Comparison of patients receiving PEP versus patients not receiving PEP and not being treated with oseltamivir should they become infected.

  2. 2.

    Comparison of patients receiving PEP versus patients not receiving PEP but being treated with oseltamivir should they become infected.


The model was run with an attack rate in household contacts of 8% for the base case, with higher rates (up to 30%, representing pandemic conditions) tested in sensitivity analyses. A societal perspective and other key parameters were tested in sensitivity analysis. The year of costing was 2002. The time span for the model was up to 1 year (including one influenza season), but loss of life was included in the QALY calculation and based on expected life expectancy.

Results: PEP with oseltamivir results in reduced morbidity (i.e. fewer influenza cases) and associated reductions in complications, hospitalisations and mortality due to influenza. When comparing oseltamivir PEP with no prophylaxis for contact attack rates of 8%, 12% and 30%, the mean costs per QALY gained for scenario one were estimated at £29 938, £18 697 and £5403, respectively; the mean costs per case avoided were £467, £293 and £84, respectively. The corresponding results for scenario two were £52 202, £31 610 and £9688 per QALY gained.

Conclusions: PEP with oseltamivir is likely to be a cost-effective strategy for family contacts in the UK from a healthcare payer perspective when influenza-like illness contact attack rates are 8% or higher and the only treatment given is ‘usual care’.

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Beate Sander
    • 1
  • Frederick G. Hayden
    • 2
  • Marlene Gyldmark
    • 3
  • Louis P. GarrisonJr
    • 3
  1. 1.Division of Clinical Decision-Making and Health Care ResearchUniversity Health NetworkTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Department of Internal MedicineUniversity of Virginia School of MedicineCharlottesvilleUSA
  3. 3.Pharmaceuticals Division, Health Economics and Strategic PricingF. Hoffmann-La Roche LtdBaselSwitzerland
  4. 4.Pharmaceuticals Division, Health Economics and Strategic PricingHoffmann-La Roche Ltd.BaselSwitzerland