RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.
Am J Kidney Dis. 2010 Mar;55(3):463-73. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2009.11.017. Epub 2010 Feb 8.
Microalbuminuria screening may detect chronic kidney disease in its early stages, allowing for treatment that delays or prevents disease progression. The cost-effectiveness of microalbuminuria screening has not been determined.
A cost-effectiveness model simulating disease progression and costs.
SETTING & POPULATION: US patients. MODEL, PERSPECTIVE, AND TIMEFRAME: The microsimulation model follows up disease progression and costs in a cohort of simulated patients from age 50 to 90 years or death. Costs are evaluated from the health care system perspective.
Microalbuminuria screening at 1-, 2-, 5-, or 10-year intervals followed by treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers. We considered universal screening, as well as screening targeted at persons with diabetes, persons with hypertension but no diabetes, and persons with neither diabetes nor hypertension.
Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.
For the full model population, universal screening increases costs and increases QALYs. Universal annual screening starting at age 50 years has a cost-effectiveness ratio of $73,000/QALY relative to no screening and $145,000/QALY relative to usual care. Cost-effectiveness ratios improved with longer screening intervals. Relative to no screening, targeted annual screening has cost-effectiveness ratios of $21,000/QALY, $55,000/QALY, and $155,000/QALY for persons with diabetes, those with hypertension, and those with neither current diabetes nor current hypertension, respectively.
Results necessarily are based on a microsimulation model because of the long time horizon appropriate for chronic kidney disease. The model includes only health care costs.
Microalbuminuria screening is cost-effective for patients with diabetes or hypertension, but is not cost-effective for patients with neither diabetes nor hypertension unless screening is conducted at longer intervals or as part of existing physician visits.
微量白蛋白尿筛查可以在慢性肾脏病早期发现疾病,从而进行治疗,延缓或阻止疾病进展。目前尚未确定微量白蛋白尿筛查的成本效益。
一种成本效益模型,用于模拟疾病进展和成本。
美国患者。模型、视角和时间范围:该微模拟模型对模拟患者队列从 50 岁到 90 岁或死亡的疾病进展和成本进行随访。从医疗保健系统的角度评估成本。
每年 1 次、2 次、5 次或 10 次进行微量白蛋白尿筛查,然后用血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂或血管紧张素Ⅱ受体阻滞剂进行治疗。我们考虑了普遍性筛查,以及针对糖尿病患者、无糖尿病的高血压患者和既无糖尿病又无高血压患者的筛查。
对于全人群模型,普遍筛查会增加成本并增加质量调整生命年(QALYs)。从 50 岁开始,每年进行一次普遍性筛查,与不筛查相比,成本效益比为 73000 美元/QALY,与常规治疗相比,成本效益比为 145000 美元/QALY。随着筛查间隔时间的延长,成本效益比得到改善。与不筛查相比,针对糖尿病患者、高血压患者和既无当前糖尿病又无当前高血压患者的年度靶向筛查的成本效益比分别为 21000 美元/QALY、55000 美元/QALY 和 155000 美元/QALY。
由于慢性肾脏病的时间跨度较长,结果必然基于微模拟模型。该模型仅包括医疗保健成本。
对于患有糖尿病或高血压的患者,微量白蛋白尿筛查具有成本效益,但对于既无糖尿病又无高血压的患者,除非筛查间隔时间较长或作为现有医生就诊的一部分,否则筛查不具有成本效益。