Empiric parenteral antibiotic treatment of patients with fibromyalgia and fatigue and a positive serologic result for Lyme disease

A cost- effectiveness analysis

R. W. Lightfoot, B. J. Luft, Daniel Wallace Rahn, A. C. Steere, L. H. Sigal, D. C. Zoschke, P. Gardner, M. C. Britton, R. L. Kaufman

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

Purpose: To examine the cost-effectiveness of empirical, parenteral antibiotic treatment of patients with chronic fatigue and myalgia and a positive serologic result for Lyme disease who lack classic manifestations. Data Sources: Peer-reviewed journals, opinion of experts in the field, and published epidemiologic reports. Study Selection: Consensus by authors on articles that indicated methods for patient selection; on criteria used for diagnosis; on immunologic methods used for classifying patients; on the dose and duration of therapy; and on criteria by which responses to therapy were ascertained. Data Extraction: In a cost-effectiveness model, the costs and benefits of empirical parenteral therapy for patients seropositive for Lyme disease were compared with a strategy in which only patients having classical symptoms of Lyme disease were treated. Data Synthesis: In areas endemic for Lyme disease, the incidence of false-positive serologic results in patients with nonspecific myalgia or fatigue exceeds by four to one the incidence of true-positive results in patients with nonclassical infections. Treatment of the former group of patients costs $86 221 for each true-positive patient treated. The empirical strategy causes 29 cases of drug toxicity for every case in the more conservative strategy. If patients were willing to pay $3485 to eliminate anxiety about not treating possible true Lyme disease, the empirical strategy would break even. Conclusion: For most patients with a positive Lyme antibody titer whose only symptoms are nonspecific myalgia or fatigue the risks and costs of empirical parenteral antibiotic therapy exceed the benefits. Only when the value of patient anxiety about leaving a positive test untreated exceeds the cost of such therapy is the empirical treatment cost-effective.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)503-509
Number of pages7
JournalAnnals of internal medicine
Volume119
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1993

Fingerprint

Cost of Illness
Fibromyalgia
Lyme Disease
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Fatigue
Anti-Bacterial Agents
Myalgia
Therapeutics
Costs and Cost Analysis
Anxiety
Endemic Diseases
Information Storage and Retrieval
Incidence
Expert Testimony
Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
Health Care Costs
Patient Selection
Consensus

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Empiric parenteral antibiotic treatment of patients with fibromyalgia and fatigue and a positive serologic result for Lyme disease : A cost- effectiveness analysis. / Lightfoot, R. W.; Luft, B. J.; Rahn, Daniel Wallace; Steere, A. C.; Sigal, L. H.; Zoschke, D. C.; Gardner, P.; Britton, M. C.; Kaufman, R. L.

In: Annals of internal medicine, Vol. 119, No. 6, 01.01.1993, p. 503-509.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Lightfoot, R. W. ; Luft, B. J. ; Rahn, Daniel Wallace ; Steere, A. C. ; Sigal, L. H. ; Zoschke, D. C. ; Gardner, P. ; Britton, M. C. ; Kaufman, R. L. / Empiric parenteral antibiotic treatment of patients with fibromyalgia and fatigue and a positive serologic result for Lyme disease : A cost- effectiveness analysis. In: Annals of internal medicine. 1993 ; Vol. 119, No. 6. pp. 503-509.
@article{59732412bd354edcb77d7dc9e015503b,
title = "Empiric parenteral antibiotic treatment of patients with fibromyalgia and fatigue and a positive serologic result for Lyme disease: A cost- effectiveness analysis",
abstract = "Purpose: To examine the cost-effectiveness of empirical, parenteral antibiotic treatment of patients with chronic fatigue and myalgia and a positive serologic result for Lyme disease who lack classic manifestations. Data Sources: Peer-reviewed journals, opinion of experts in the field, and published epidemiologic reports. Study Selection: Consensus by authors on articles that indicated methods for patient selection; on criteria used for diagnosis; on immunologic methods used for classifying patients; on the dose and duration of therapy; and on criteria by which responses to therapy were ascertained. Data Extraction: In a cost-effectiveness model, the costs and benefits of empirical parenteral therapy for patients seropositive for Lyme disease were compared with a strategy in which only patients having classical symptoms of Lyme disease were treated. Data Synthesis: In areas endemic for Lyme disease, the incidence of false-positive serologic results in patients with nonspecific myalgia or fatigue exceeds by four to one the incidence of true-positive results in patients with nonclassical infections. Treatment of the former group of patients costs $86 221 for each true-positive patient treated. The empirical strategy causes 29 cases of drug toxicity for every case in the more conservative strategy. If patients were willing to pay $3485 to eliminate anxiety about not treating possible true Lyme disease, the empirical strategy would break even. Conclusion: For most patients with a positive Lyme antibody titer whose only symptoms are nonspecific myalgia or fatigue the risks and costs of empirical parenteral antibiotic therapy exceed the benefits. Only when the value of patient anxiety about leaving a positive test untreated exceeds the cost of such therapy is the empirical treatment cost-effective.",
author = "Lightfoot, {R. W.} and Luft, {B. J.} and Rahn, {Daniel Wallace} and Steere, {A. C.} and Sigal, {L. H.} and Zoschke, {D. C.} and P. Gardner and Britton, {M. C.} and Kaufman, {R. L.}",
year = "1993",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.7326/0003-4819-119-6-199309150-00010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "119",
pages = "503--509",
journal = "Annals of Internal Medicine",
issn = "0003-4819",
publisher = "American College of Physicians",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Empiric parenteral antibiotic treatment of patients with fibromyalgia and fatigue and a positive serologic result for Lyme disease

T2 - A cost- effectiveness analysis

AU - Lightfoot, R. W.

AU - Luft, B. J.

AU - Rahn, Daniel Wallace

AU - Steere, A. C.

AU - Sigal, L. H.

AU - Zoschke, D. C.

AU - Gardner, P.

AU - Britton, M. C.

AU - Kaufman, R. L.

PY - 1993/1/1

Y1 - 1993/1/1

N2 - Purpose: To examine the cost-effectiveness of empirical, parenteral antibiotic treatment of patients with chronic fatigue and myalgia and a positive serologic result for Lyme disease who lack classic manifestations. Data Sources: Peer-reviewed journals, opinion of experts in the field, and published epidemiologic reports. Study Selection: Consensus by authors on articles that indicated methods for patient selection; on criteria used for diagnosis; on immunologic methods used for classifying patients; on the dose and duration of therapy; and on criteria by which responses to therapy were ascertained. Data Extraction: In a cost-effectiveness model, the costs and benefits of empirical parenteral therapy for patients seropositive for Lyme disease were compared with a strategy in which only patients having classical symptoms of Lyme disease were treated. Data Synthesis: In areas endemic for Lyme disease, the incidence of false-positive serologic results in patients with nonspecific myalgia or fatigue exceeds by four to one the incidence of true-positive results in patients with nonclassical infections. Treatment of the former group of patients costs $86 221 for each true-positive patient treated. The empirical strategy causes 29 cases of drug toxicity for every case in the more conservative strategy. If patients were willing to pay $3485 to eliminate anxiety about not treating possible true Lyme disease, the empirical strategy would break even. Conclusion: For most patients with a positive Lyme antibody titer whose only symptoms are nonspecific myalgia or fatigue the risks and costs of empirical parenteral antibiotic therapy exceed the benefits. Only when the value of patient anxiety about leaving a positive test untreated exceeds the cost of such therapy is the empirical treatment cost-effective.

AB - Purpose: To examine the cost-effectiveness of empirical, parenteral antibiotic treatment of patients with chronic fatigue and myalgia and a positive serologic result for Lyme disease who lack classic manifestations. Data Sources: Peer-reviewed journals, opinion of experts in the field, and published epidemiologic reports. Study Selection: Consensus by authors on articles that indicated methods for patient selection; on criteria used for diagnosis; on immunologic methods used for classifying patients; on the dose and duration of therapy; and on criteria by which responses to therapy were ascertained. Data Extraction: In a cost-effectiveness model, the costs and benefits of empirical parenteral therapy for patients seropositive for Lyme disease were compared with a strategy in which only patients having classical symptoms of Lyme disease were treated. Data Synthesis: In areas endemic for Lyme disease, the incidence of false-positive serologic results in patients with nonspecific myalgia or fatigue exceeds by four to one the incidence of true-positive results in patients with nonclassical infections. Treatment of the former group of patients costs $86 221 for each true-positive patient treated. The empirical strategy causes 29 cases of drug toxicity for every case in the more conservative strategy. If patients were willing to pay $3485 to eliminate anxiety about not treating possible true Lyme disease, the empirical strategy would break even. Conclusion: For most patients with a positive Lyme antibody titer whose only symptoms are nonspecific myalgia or fatigue the risks and costs of empirical parenteral antibiotic therapy exceed the benefits. Only when the value of patient anxiety about leaving a positive test untreated exceeds the cost of such therapy is the empirical treatment cost-effective.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027440726&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027440726&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.7326/0003-4819-119-6-199309150-00010

DO - 10.7326/0003-4819-119-6-199309150-00010

M3 - Review article

VL - 119

SP - 503

EP - 509

JO - Annals of Internal Medicine

JF - Annals of Internal Medicine

SN - 0003-4819

IS - 6

ER -