[Evaluation of hospital cost of six days of treatment of deep venous thrombosis. Comparison of subcutaneous nadroparin and intravenous heparin in 40 patients].

For curative treatment of deep vein thrombosis, all trials have shown that twice a day low molecular weight heparin were at least as efficacious as unfractionated heparin on clot reduction or stabilisation. Through the unit cost of low molecular weight heparin is higher, the real cost of treatment should take into account not only the cost of the drug, but also the cost of materials used and lab tests as well as the time necessary. We have therefore prospectively compared the operating and overall costs of nadroparin and intravenous heparin treatment of deep vein thrombosis in hospitalised patients (21 with unfractionated heparin and 19 with nadroparin). The results show that low molecular weight heparin is no more expensive than treatment with unfractionated heparin (336 +/- 74.9 F for unfractionated heparin and 344.9 +/- 44.05 F for nadroparin). In addition, using nadroparin rather than heparin saves approximately one hour per patient per week nursing time (42 +/- 7 minutes vs 104.0 +/- 10.7 minutes, p < 0.05). The methodology of this study should be repeated with other low molecular weight heparin and low molecular weight heparin compare not only to standard i.v. heparin, but also to standard SC heparin.