cost‐effectiveness analysis

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:2018年,莫桑比克卫生部启动了实施差异化服务提供模式(DSDM)以优化艾滋病毒服务提供的指南,提高护理保留率,并最终降低与艾滋病毒相关的死亡率。模型是快速跟踪的,3个月的抗逆转录病毒药物配药,社区抗逆转录病毒治疗小组,坚持俱乐部,家庭方式和三个一站式商店模式:青少年友好型健康服务,妇幼保健,和肺结核。我们进行了成本效益分析和预算影响分析,以将这些模型与传统服务进行比较。
    方法:我们根据每个模型的入学率百分比和研究期间每年的结果概率(治疗保留12个月)构建了一个决策树模型,其中3个用于成本效益分析(2019-2021),3个用于预算影响分析(2022-2024)。从卫生系统的角度来看,这些分析的费用主要是按客户年估算的。从社会角度进行了二次成本效益分析。预算影响分析成本包括抗逆转录病毒药物,实验室测试和服务提供相互作用。成本效益分析还包括启动,培训和客户的机会成本。使用不受控制的中断时间序列分析来评估有效性,比较实施差异化模型前后的结果。进行了单向敏感性分析,以确定不确定性的驱动因素。
    结果:实施DSDM后,12个月保留率平均增加14.9个百分点(95%CI:12.2,17.8),从47.6%(95%CI,44.9-50.2)到62.5%(95%CI,60.9-64.1)。DSDM和常规护理的平均成本差异为-600万美元(173,391,277与179,461,668)和-3250万(394,705,618与433,232,289)从卫生系统和社会的角度来看,分别。因此,DSDM主导了常规护理。在单向敏感性分析中,结果对常规护理交互成本最敏感。对于150万人口来说,与DSDM相关的3年基本财务成本为5.5亿美元,与传统护理的5.64亿美元相比。
    结论:在开始抗逆转录病毒治疗12个月后,DSDM更便宜,更有效地留住客户,估计从2022年到2024年为卫生系统节省约1400万美元。
    BACKGROUND: In 2018, the Mozambique Ministry of Health launched guidelines for implementing differentiated service delivery models (DSDMs) to optimize HIV service delivery, improve retention in care, and ultimately reduce HIV-associated mortality. The models were fast-track, 3-month antiretrovirals dispensing, community antiretroviral therapy groups, adherence clubs, family approach and three one-stop shop models: adolescent-friendly health services, maternal and child health, and tuberculosis. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis and budget impact analysis to compare these models to conventional services.
    METHODS: We constructed a decision tree model based on the percentage of enrolment in each model and the probability of the outcome (12-month retention in treatment) for each year of the study period-three for the cost-effectiveness analysis (2019-2021) and three for the budget impact analysis (2022-2024). Costs for these analyses were primarily estimated per client-year from the health system perspective. A secondary cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from the societal perspective. Budget impact analysis costs included antiretrovirals, laboratory tests and service provision interactions. Cost-effectiveness analysis additionally included start-up, training and clients\' opportunity costs. Effectiveness was estimated using an uncontrolled interrupted time series analysis comparing the outcome before and after the implementation of the differentiated models. A one-way sensitivity analysis was conducted to identify drivers of uncertainty.
    RESULTS: After implementation of the DSDMs, there was a mean increase of 14.9 percentage points (95% CI: 12.2, 17.8) in 12-month retention, from 47.6% (95% CI, 44.9-50.2) to 62.5% (95% CI, 60.9-64.1). The mean cost difference comparing DSDMs and conventional care was US$ -6 million (173,391,277 vs. 179,461,668) and -32.5 million (394,705,618 vs. 433,232,289) from the health system and the societal perspective, respectively. Therefore, DSDMs dominated conventional care. Results were most sensitive to conventional care interaction costs in the one-way sensitivity analysis. For a population of 1.5 million, the base-case 3-year financial costs associated with the DSDMs was US$550 million, compared with US$564 million for conventional care.
    CONCLUSIONS: DSDMs were less expensive and more effective in retaining clients 12 months after antiretroviral therapy initiation and were estimated to save approximately US$14 million for the health system from 2022 to 2024.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目标:中国量采购(VBP)计划于2022年启动。该计划启动后,机器人手臂辅助全膝关节置换术的成本效益尚不确定。该研究的目的是调查中国机械臂辅助全膝关节置换术的成本效益以及VBP计划对其成本效益的影响。
    方法:该研究是基于马尔可夫模型的成本效益研究。回顾性纳入2019年1月至2021年12月初次全膝关节置换术的病例。建立了马尔可夫模型来模拟晚期膝骨关节炎患者。在中国实施VBP计划前后,比较了手动和机械臂辅助的全膝关节置换术的成本效益。进行了概率和敏感性分析。
    结果:机械臂辅助全膝关节置换术在开始VBP计划前后显示出更好的恢复和更低的翻修率。基于机械臂的TKA优于手动全膝关节置换术,在应用批量采购之前的有效性增加了0.26(16.87比16.61),在应用批量采购之后的有效性增加了0.52(16.96比16.43),分别。该程序在新的采购系统中更具成本效益(17.13比16.89)。手动或机械臂辅助TKA的成本是我们模型中最敏感的参数。
    结论:基于中国以前和当前的医疗收费系统,与传统的手动全膝关节置换术相比,机械臂辅助全膝关节置换术是一种更具成本效益的手术。如基于数量的采购VBP计划所示,该程序可以更具成本效益。
    OBJECTIVE: The volume based procurement (VBP) program in China was initiated in 2022. The cost-effectiveness of robotic arm assisted total knee arthroplasty is yet uncertain after the initiation of the program. The objective of the study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of robotic arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty and the influence of the VBP program to its cost-effectiveness in China.
    METHODS: The study was a Markov model-based cost-effectiveness study. Cases of primary total knee arthroplasty from January 2019 to December 2021 were included retrospectively. A Markov model was developed to simulate patients with advanced knee osteoarthritis. Manual and robotic arm-assisted total knee arthroplasties were compared for cost-effectiveness before and after the engagement of the VBP program in China. Probability and sensitivity analysis were conducted.
    RESULTS: Robotic arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty showed better recovery and lower revision rates before and after initiation of the VBP program. Robotic arm-based TKA was superior to manual total knee arthroplasty, with an increased effectiveness of 0.26 (16.87 vs 16.61) before and 0.52 (16.96 vs 16.43) after the application of Volume-based procurement, respectively. The procedure is more cost-effective in the new procurement system (17.13 vs 16.89). Costs of manual or robotic arm-assisted TKA were the most sensitive parameters in our model.
    CONCLUSIONS: Based on previous and current medical charging systems in China, robotic arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty is a more cost-effective procedure compared to traditional manual total knee arthroplasty. As the volume-based procurement VBP program shows, the procedure can be more cost-effective.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    报告在女性压力性尿失禁(SUI)的手术管理中,可调节锚定单切口微型吊索(微型吊索)与无张力标准尿道中部吊索(标准吊索)的成本效益。
    在英国21家医院中,从年龄≥18岁的女性中收集了有关资源使用和质量的数据,这些女性主要接受尿道中吊带手术。资源使用和生活质量(QoL)数据与单切口微型吊索和标准合成尿道中段吊索随机对照试验(SIMSRCT)一起前瞻性收集,用于女性SUI的手术治疗。采用了具有3年随访的卫生服务提供者(国家卫生服务[NHS])的观点来估算干预措施和所有后续资源使用的成本。通用仪器,EuroQolEQ-5D-3L,用于估计QoL。结果报告为增量成本,质量调整寿命年(QALY)和每QALY的增量成本。
    基本案例分析结果表明,尽管迷你吊索的成本较低,在3年随访期间,费用:小型吊索与标准吊索:£-6[95%CI-228-208]或QALYs:0.005[95%CI-0.068-0.073]无显著差异。存在很大的不确定性,有56%和44%的概率认为迷你吊索和标准吊索是最具成本效益的治疗方法,分别,QALY的支付意愿阈值为2万英镑。
    3岁时,小型吊索和标准吊索在成本和QALY上没有显着差异。在SUI治疗中使用的设备的长期并发症和故障率仍然存在一些不确定性;因此,重要的是建立这些手术的长期临床和成本效益。
    UNASSIGNED: To report on the cost-effectiveness of adjustable anchored single-incision mini-slings (mini-slings) compared with tension-free standard mid-urethral slings (standard slings) in the surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence (SUI).
    UNASSIGNED: Data on resource use and quality were collected from women aged ≥18 years with predominant SUI undergoing mid-urethral sling procedures in 21 UK hospitals. Resource use and quality of life (QoL) data were prospectively collected alongside the Single-Incision Mini-Slings versus standard synthetic mid-urethral slings Randomised Control Trial (SIMS RCT), for surgical treatment of SUI in women. A health service provider\'s (National Health Service [NHS]) perspective with 3-year follow-up was adopted to estimate the costs of the intervention and all subsequent resource use. A generic instrument, EuroQol EQ-5D-3L, was used to estimate the QoL. Results are reported as incremental costs, quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost per QALY.
    UNASSIGNED: Base case analysis results show that although mini-slings cost less, there was no significant difference in costs: mini-slings versus standard slings: £-6 [95% CI -228-208] or in QALYs: 0.005 [95% CI -0.068-0.073] over the 3-year follow-up. There is substantial uncertainty, with a 56% and 44% probability that mini-slings and standard slings are the most cost-effective treatment, respectively, at a £20 000 willingness-to-pay threshold value for a QALY.
    UNASSIGNED: At 3 years, there is no significant difference between mini-slings and standard slings in costs and QALYs. There is still some uncertainty over the long-term complications and failure rates of the devices used in the treatment of SUI; therefore, it is important to establish the long-term clinical and cost-effectiveness of these procedures.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (NCCRT) is often considered for locally-advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (LA-ESCC) patients; however, no data regarding the cost-effectiveness of this treatment is available. Our study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of NCCRT versus esophagectomy for LA-ESCC at population level.
    We identified LA-ESCC patients diagnosed within 2008-2009 and treated with either NCCRT or esophagectomy through the Taiwan Cancer Registry. We included potential confounding covariables (age, gender, residency, comorbidity, social-economic status, disease stage, treating hospital level and surgeon\'s experience, and the use of endoscopic ultrasound before treatment) and used propensity score (PS) to construct a 1:1 population. The duration of interest was three years within the date of diagnosis. Effectiveness was measured as overall survival. We took the payer\'s perspective and converted the cost to 2014 United States dollars (USD). In sensitivity analysis, we evaluated the potential impact of an unmeasured confounder on the statistical significance of incremental net benefit at suggested willingness-to-pay.
    Our study population constituted 150 PS matched subjects. The mean cost (2014 USD) and survival (year) were higher for NCCRT compared with esophagectomy (US$91,460 vs. $75,836 for cost; 2.2 vs. 1.8 for survival) with an estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$39,060/life-year.
    When compared to esophagectomy, NCCRT is likely to improve survival and is probably more cost-effective. Cost-effectiveness results should be interpreted with caution given our results were sensitive to potential unmeasured confounder(s) in sensitivity analysis.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

公众号