ABSTRACT
The direct costs of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) are high for two main reasons: demand for the product exceeds its supply and the process by which IVIG is produced is complex. Demand is unlikely to be reduced because new indications for the use of IVIG are frequently being suggested. Consequently, unless there is either a substantial increase in the supply of plasma or a large reduction in the production costs of IVIG the price will remain relatively high. Health-care resources in most, if not all, countries are limited and there are competing uses for funds. It is therefore important to compare alternative ways of treating particular conditions in order to see which is most clinically and economically appropriate. IVIG’s high price acts as a disincentive for its use. However, the acquisition cost of a product such as IVIG cannot on its own determine whether treatment with it is ‘cost-effective’. Rather, information on costs needs to be combined with data on outcomes, to see what level of clinical change can be expected by spending money in one way rather than another or, similarly, to see what it costs to achieve a predefined level of change. This chapter describes methods that have been developed in the area of health economics by which costs and outcomes can be compared, and summarizes the healtheconomic evidence for the use of IVIG in treating poly neuropathies.
