Suppr超能文献

评估一种新型抗抑郁药的经济价值。一种支付意愿的方法。

Assessing the economic value of a new antidepressant. A willingness-to-pay approach.

作者信息

O'Brien B J, Novosel S, Torrance G, Streiner D

机构信息

Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Pharmacoeconomics. 1995 Jul;8(1):34-45. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199508010-00006.

Abstract

Using the method of willingness to pay (WTP), this study assesses the value of a new antidepressant, moclobemide, relative to that of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), which have equivalent efficacy but less favourable adverse effect profiles. From a published meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials, we identified 7 adverse effects, the risk of which differed significantly between moclobemide and TCAs. We obtained risk reduction data and descriptions of adverse effects from interviews with 95 individuals who had mild to moderate depression and who had been taking one or more TCAs in the previous year. Using a visual analogue scale, respondents ranked and rated each adverse effect. Participants were then asked (using the scenario of additional out-of-pocket drug payment) to quantify the maximum amount that they would pay for a new drug that reduced each adverse effect by the specified probability. Blurred vision and tremor were ranked and rated as the most bothersome adverse effects, with dry mouth being the least bothersome. On average, respondents were willing to pay an additional $Can22 per month [95% confidence interval (CI) 16-28] to reduce the risk of blurred vision from 10 to 5%. The lowest WTP value was for reducing the risk of dry mouth from 40 to 15%, at $Can11 per month (95% CI 8-15). Although not measured directly, we derived 2 estimates of WTP for multiple (i.e. all 7) risk reductions. We obtained upper and lower WTP limits of $Can118 and $Can36 per month, respectively, depending upon aggregation assumptions. Compared with the TCAs amitriptyline and imipramine, the net cost of moclobemide is greater, but the overall net benefit (WTP minus cost) is ambiguous given uncertainty about WTP aggregation over adverse effects. However, compared with the TCAs desipramine and clomipramine, the net benefit of moclobemide is unambiguously positive. We conclude that the WTP approach is a potentially valuable tool that requires more development for use in healthcare economic evaluation.

摘要

本研究采用支付意愿法(WTP),评估了新型抗抑郁药吗氯贝胺相对于三环类抗抑郁药(TCA)的价值,二者疗效相当,但TCA的不良反应谱更不理想。通过已发表的对照临床试验荟萃分析,我们确定了7种不良反应,吗氯贝胺和TCA在这些不良反应的风险上存在显著差异。我们从对95名轻度至中度抑郁症患者的访谈中获取了风险降低数据及不良反应描述,这些患者在前一年服用过一种或多种TCA。使用视觉模拟量表,受访者对每种不良反应进行排序和评级。然后要求参与者(采用额外自付药费的情景)量化他们为一种能将每种不良反应按指定概率降低的新药愿意支付的最高金额。视力模糊和震颤被列为最困扰的不良反应,口干则是最不困扰的。平均而言,受访者愿意每月额外支付22加元[95%置信区间(CI)16 - 28],将视力模糊风险从10%降至5%。降低口干风险从40%至15%的支付意愿值最低,为每月11加元(95% CI 8 - 15)。虽然未直接测量,但我们得出了针对多种(即全部7种)风险降低的支付意愿的两个估计值。根据汇总假设,我们分别得出每月支付意愿的上限和下限为118加元和36加元。与TCA中的阿米替林和丙咪嗪相比,吗氯贝胺的净成本更高,但鉴于不良反应支付意愿汇总的不确定性,总体净收益(支付意愿减去成本)并不明确。然而,与TCA中的地昔帕明和氯米帕明相比,吗氯贝胺的净收益无疑是正向的。我们得出结论,支付意愿法是一种潜在有价值的工具,在医疗保健经济评估中使用还需要进一步完善。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验