Paltiel A D, Fuhlbrigge A L, Kitch B T, Liljas B, Weiss S T, Neumann P J, Kuntz K M
Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06520-8034, USA
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2001 Jul;108(1):39-46. doi: 10.1067/mai.2001.116289.
Inhaled corticosteroids remain underused among United States-based clinicians in treating mild-to-moderate adult asthma.
The purpose of this investigation was to estimate the clinical impact, health-related quality of life, cost, and cost-effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroid therapy in a population of patients aged 18 years and over with FEV(1) = 60% to 100% of predicted normal.
We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of quick relievers (eg, short-acting beta-agonists) on an as-needed basis plus inhaled corticosteroid therapy versus quick relievers alone. A mathematical simulation model was developed to forecast symptoms, acute exacerbations, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), health care costs, and cost-effectiveness, measured in both dollars per QALY gained and dollars per symptom-free day gained. All evaluation outcomes were discounted at an annual rate of 3% and measured over a 10-year planning horizon. Data on the natural history of disease, drug efficacy, patient preferences, and economic costs were obtained from a variety of observational cohorts, randomized trials, and patient surveys.
Over a 10-year period, use of inhaled corticosteroids increases total health costs from roughly $5,200 to $8,400 and improves QALYs from 6.8 to 7.0, implying an incremental cost of $13,500 per QALY gained. Costs per symptom-free day gained are $7.50. Both per-person acute exacerbations and hospitalizations are reduced by 33%. The cost-effectiveness findings are sensitive to the assumed efficacy and side-effects of inhaled corticosteroid therapy.
Inhaled corticosteroids appear to deliver good comparative value in adults with mild-to-moderate asthma. Although more research is needed to understand their impact on preferences regarding side effects and compliance, these findings might be useful for priority-setting in limited resource situations.
在美国,吸入性糖皮质激素在治疗轻至中度成人哮喘方面的使用仍然不足。
本研究旨在评估吸入性糖皮质激素疗法对18岁及以上、第一秒用力呼气容积(FEV₁)为预测正常值的60%至100%的患者群体的临床影响、健康相关生活质量、成本及成本效益。
我们进行了一项成本效益分析,比较按需使用速效缓解药物(如短效β受体激动剂)加吸入性糖皮质激素疗法与仅使用速效缓解药物的效果。开发了一个数学模拟模型来预测症状、急性加重、质量调整生命年(QALY)、医疗保健成本及成本效益,成本效益以每获得一个QALY的美元数和每增加一个无症状天数的美元数来衡量。所有评估结果均按每年3%的贴现率进行贴现,并在10年的规划期内进行衡量。关于疾病自然史、药物疗效、患者偏好及经济成本的数据来自各种观察性队列研究、随机试验及患者调查。
在10年期间,使用吸入性糖皮质激素会使总医疗成本从约5200美元增加到8400美元,并使QALY从6.8提高到7.0,这意味着每获得一个QALY的增量成本为13500美元。每增加一个无症状天数的成本为7.50美元。人均急性加重和住院次数均减少了33%。成本效益结果对吸入性糖皮质激素疗法的假定疗效和副作用敏感。
吸入性糖皮质激素在轻至中度哮喘成人患者中似乎具有较好的比较价值。尽管需要更多研究来了解其对副作用偏好和依从性的影响,但这些发现可能有助于在资源有限的情况下确定优先事项。