Remonnay R, Morelle M, Pommier P, Haie-Meder C, Quetin P, Kerr C, Delannes M, Castelain B, Peignaux K, Kirova Y, Romestaing P, Williaume D, Krzisch C, Thomas L, Lang P, Baron M H, Cussac A, Lesaunier F, Maillard S, Barillot I, Charra-Brunaud C, Carrère M-O, Peiffert D
Université de Lyon, France.
Cancer Radiother. 2010 Jun;14(3):161-8. doi: 10.1016/j.canrad.2009.11.004. Epub 2010 Mar 4.
Our study aims at evaluating the cost of pulsed dose-rate (PDR) brachytherapy with optimized dose distribution versus traditional treatments (iridium wires, cesium, non-optimized PDR). Issues surrounding reimbursement were also explored.
This prospective, multicentre, non-randomised study conducted in the framework of a project entitled "Support Program for Costly Diagnostic and Therapeutic Innovations" involved 21 hospitals. Patients with cervix carcinoma received either classical brachytherapy or the innovation. The direct medical costs of staff and equipment, as well as the costs of radioactive sources, consumables and building renovation were evaluated from a hospital point of view using a microcosting approach. Subsequent costs per brachytherapy were compared between the four strategies.
The economic study included 463 patients over two years. The main resources categories associated with PDR brachytherapy (whether optimized or not) were radioactive sources (1053euro) and source projectors (735euro). Optimized PDR induced higher cost of imagery and dosimetry (respectively 130euro and 367euro) than non-optimized PDR (47euro and 75euro). Extra costs of innovation over the less costly strategy (iridium wires) reached more than 2100euro per treatment, but could be reduced by half in the hypothesis of 40 patients treated per year (instead of 24 in the study).
Aside from staff, imaging and dosimetry, the current hospital reimbursements largely underestimated the cost of innovation related to equipment and sources.
我们的研究旨在评估剂量率脉冲式(PDR)近距离放射治疗在优化剂量分布情况下与传统治疗方法(铱丝、铯、未优化的PDR)相比的成本。同时也探讨了与报销相关的问题。
这项前瞻性、多中心、非随机研究是在一个名为“昂贵诊断与治疗创新支持项目”的框架内进行的,涉及21家医院。宫颈癌患者接受了经典近距离放射治疗或创新治疗。从医院角度采用微观成本核算方法评估了人员和设备的直接医疗成本,以及放射源、耗材和建筑翻新的成本。随后比较了四种治疗策略下每次近距离放射治疗的成本。
经济研究在两年内纳入了463名患者。与PDR近距离放射治疗(无论是否优化)相关的主要资源类别是放射源(1053欧元)和源投影仪(735欧元)。优化后的PDR在影像和剂量测定方面的成本(分别为130欧元和367欧元)高于未优化的PDR(47欧元和75欧元)。与成本较低的策略(铱丝)相比,创新治疗的额外成本每次治疗超过2100欧元,但在每年治疗40名患者的假设下(而不是研究中的24名)可以减半。
除了人员、影像和剂量测定外,目前医院的报销费用在很大程度上低估了与设备和放射源相关的创新成本。