The authors comment on Dr. Murray Krahn and associates findings on the
direct and indirect costs of asthma in Canada in 1990 (see pages 821
and 831 of this issue). They believe this study is the most meticulous
of recent cost-of-illness analyses of the economic burden of asthma.
They argue that although Krahn and associates' study is a useful addit
ion to the economic literature on this common disorder, the cost-of-il
lness method of analysis cannot address the question of the relative c
osts and benefits of specific interventions. The next task in improvin
g the management of asthma is therefore to undertake studies that will
allow clinical and administrative decision-makers to access the relat
ive cost-effectiveness of a range of available treatments.