Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal JSFK (Jurnal Sains Farmasi & Klinis) Pharmacoscript
Yusransyah Yusransyah
Pharmacy Study Program, Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Kesehatan Salsabila Serang, Banten, Indonesia
Biochemistry, Genetics & Molecular Biology Chemistry Health Professions Immunology & microbiology Medicine & Pharmacology Public Health

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Cost-Effectiveness of Oseltamivir and Favipiravir in Covid-19 Patients: a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Study in a Hospital Yusransyah Yusransyah; Baha Udin S.farm
JSFK (Jurnal Sains Farmasi & Klinis) Vol 12 No 1 (2025): J Sains Farm Klin 12(1), April 2025
Publisher : Fakultas Farmasi Universitas Andalas

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25077/jsfk.12.1.29-35.2025

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic poses not only a threat to health but also to the global economy, including healthcare costs. Although there is no specific drug for COVID-19 patients, there are antiviral drugs such as oseltamivir and favipiravir that can be used to treat COVID-19. The purpose of this study was to determine the most cost-effective antiviral therapy between oseltamivir and favipiravir for COVID-19 patients in one of the hospitals in Banten province. The pharmacoeconomic method used in this study was cost-effectiveness analysis by calculating the Average Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ACER) and Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER). The results of this study showed that the ACER value of the favipiravir group (IDR  364,010 (n = 7)) was lower than the oseltamivir group (IDR 431,744 (n = 7)), with an ICER value of IDR  60,605. Based on the results of the Mann-Whitney test, there was no significant difference between the costs of the favipiravir and oseltamivir groups (p value 0.940). The sensitivity test showed that the cost of medical consumables was the cost that had the greatest impact on cost-effectiveness. Based on the calculation results, it can be concluded that the favipiravir group is more cost-effective than the oseltamivir group.
COST-UTILITY ANALYSIS OF METFORMIN AND GLIQUIDONE IN PATIENTS WITH TYPE 2 DIABETES MELLITUS AT A REGIONAL HOSPITAL IN INDONESIA Yusransyah Yusransyah; Nurfadila Siti; Nabillah Deya Adiby; Udin Baha
Pharmacoscript Vol. 9 No. 2 (2026): Pharmacoscript
Publisher : Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian Masyarakat, Universitas Perjuangan Tasikmalaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36423/pharmacoscript.v9i2.2655

Abstract

ABSTRACT Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic disease requiring lifelong treatment and imposing a considerable economic burden on healthcare systems. This study aimed to evaluate the cost–utility of metformin and gliquidone therapy among patients with T2DM treated at a regional hospital in Indonesia. An analytical observational study with a cross-sectional design was conducted among 60 outpatients with T2DM between May and June 2025, including 40 patients receiving metformin and 20 receiving gliquidone. Direct medical costs were obtained from medical records, while health utility was assessed using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire and converted into utility scores using the Indonesian EQ-5D-5L value set. Cost–utility analysis was performed using the Average Cost–Utility Ratio (ACUR) and Incremental Cost–Utility Ratio (ICUR), with health utility scores as the effectiveness outcome. Metformin therapy demonstrated lower direct medical costs than gliquidone (IDR 140,225 vs IDR 183,687). Mean utility scores were 0.776 and 0.749, respectively. Metformin produced the lowest ACUR (IDR 180,703 per utility score), whereas gliquidone showed an ACUR of IDR 245,243 per utility score. Incremental analysis indicated that gliquidone incurred higher treatment costs while providing lower health utility than metformin, indicating that gliquidone was economically dominated by metformin. Overall, metformin demonstrated the most favorable cost–utility profile and remains the preferred first-line therapy for patients with T2DM, while gliquidone may be considered in selected clinical conditions.
Co-Authors Baha Udin S.farm Nabillah Deya Adiby Nurfadila Siti Udin Baha