Greenberg Dan, Bakhai Ameet, Neumann Peter J, Cohen David J
Harvard Clinical Research Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Health Policy. 2004 Nov;70(2):207-16. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2004.03.002.
Despite technological improvements, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains limited by restenosis requiring further revascularization procedures during the ensuing year. New technologies aiming to reduce restenosis are expensive and may increase net healthcare costs. Economic evaluations of such therapies have been performed, but have been hindered by the need to assess the disutility of short-term health care events and repeat coronary revascularization as well as the lack of benchmark standards for intermediate health outcomes. The contingent valuation approach may offer particular advantages when evaluating treatments that improve short-term health outcomes.
To examine patients' willingness to pay (WTP) for treatments that may reduce the risk of restenosis and repeat revascularization after PCI.
We used a contingent valuation approach to evaluate WTP among participants in two large clinical trials evaluating new PCI devices. The baseline scenario described a 30% probability of repeat revascularization following the initial procedure. Patients were asked to indicate, using a close-ended (referendum) question, their out of pocket WTP for an improved treatment that would reduce this risk. Three different prices (500 dollars, 1000 dollars, and 1500 dollars) and three levels of absolute risk reduction (10, 20, and 30%) were randomly varied creating nine sub-samples of patients. Patients' responses were analyzed using both parametric and non-parametric methods.
1642 patients completed the WTP question. The WTP medians for the 10 and 20% risk reductions were 273 dollars and 366 dollars, respectively; the median WTP for the 30% risk reduction was significantly higher at 1162 dollars (P<0.001). Higher household income (OR=1.57, P<0.001) was independently associated with a higher WTP.
Although short-lived, avoidance of coronary restenosis may have considerable value to patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions. These findings may have important implications for emerging technologies such as drug-eluting stents.
尽管技术有所进步,但经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)仍受再狭窄限制,在随后的一年中需要进一步的血管重建手术。旨在减少再狭窄的新技术价格昂贵,可能会增加医疗保健总成本。已对这类治疗方法进行了经济学评估,但由于需要评估短期医疗事件和重复冠状动脉血管重建的负效用,以及缺乏中期健康结果的基准标准而受到阻碍。在评估改善短期健康结果的治疗方法时,条件价值评估法可能具有特殊优势。
研究患者对可能降低PCI术后再狭窄和重复血管重建风险的治疗方法的支付意愿(WTP)。
我们采用条件价值评估法,在两项评估新型PCI设备的大型临床试验参与者中评估WTP。基线情景描述了初始手术后重复血管重建的概率为30%。要求患者使用封闭式(公投)问题表明他们为降低这种风险的改进治疗方法的自付WTP。三种不同价格(500美元、1000美元和1500美元)和三个绝对风险降低水平(10%、20%和30%)随机变化,形成九个患者子样本。使用参数和非参数方法分析患者的反应。
1642名患者完成了WTP问题。风险降低10%和20%时的WTP中位数分别为273美元和366美元;风险降低30%时的WTP中位数显著更高,为1162美元(P<0.001)。较高的家庭收入(OR=1.57,P<0.001)与较高的WTP独立相关。
尽管持续时间短,但避免冠状动脉再狭窄对接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的患者可能具有相当大的价值。这些发现可能对药物洗脱支架等新兴技术具有重要意义。