Suppr超能文献

在儿童保健中使用尿试纸进行筛查的成本效益分析。

A cost-effectiveness analysis of screening urine dipsticks in well-child care.

机构信息

Penn State Hershey Children's Hospital, Department of Pediatrics, HS83, 500 University Dr, Hershey, PA 17033, USA.

出版信息

Pediatrics. 2010 Apr;125(4):660-3. doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-1980. Epub 2010 Mar 15.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Despite data suggesting that routine urine screening for chronic kidney disease (CKD) has low diagnostic yield and the American Academy of Pediatrics 2007 recommendation to discontinue this screening, pediatricians may not have recognized this change. Because the new recommendation marks a major alteration in the practice guidelines, we sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of dipstick urinalysis for detection of CKD from the primary care practitioner's perspective.

METHODS

Decision analysis was used to model a screening dipstick urinalysis strategy relative to a no-screening strategy. Data on the incidence of hematuria and proteinuria in children were derived from published reports of large cohorts of school-aged children. Direct costs were estimated from the perspective of the primary care practitioner. The measure of effectiveness was the rate of diagnoses of CKD. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated by using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

Expected costs and effectiveness for the no-screening strategy were 0 dollars because no resources were used and no cases of CKD were diagnosed. The screening strategy involved a cost per dipstick of 3.05 dollars. Accounting for both true-positive and false-positive initial screens, 14.2% of the patients required a second dipstick as per typical clinical care, bringing the expected cost of the screening strategy to 3.47 dollars per patient. In the screening strategy, 1 case of CKD was diagnosed per 800 screened, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 2779.50 dollars per case diagnosed.

CONCLUSIONS

Urine dipstick is inexpensive, but it is a poor screening test for CKD and a cost-ineffective procedure for the primary care provider. These data support the change in the American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines on the use of screening dipstick urinalysis. Clinicians must consider the cost-effectiveness of preventive care procedures to make better use of available resources.

摘要

目的

尽管有数据表明,常规尿筛查慢性肾脏病(CKD)的诊断效果不佳,且美国儿科学会 2007 年建议停止这种筛查,但儿科医生可能并未认识到这一变化。由于新的建议标志着实践指南的重大改变,我们试图从初级保健医生的角度评估用于检测 CKD 的尿试纸干化学分析的成本效益。

方法

我们使用决策分析对筛查尿试纸干化学分析策略相对于不筛查策略进行建模。儿童血尿和蛋白尿的发生率数据来自对大量学龄儿童队列的大型研究报告。直接成本从初级保健医生的角度进行估计。效果的衡量指标是 CKD 的诊断率。使用增量成本效益比评估成本效益。

结果

不筛查策略的预期成本和效果为 0 美元,因为没有使用资源,也没有诊断出 CKD 病例。筛查策略的每个试纸成本为 3.05 美元。考虑到初始筛查的真阳性和假阳性,按照典型的临床护理,有 14.2%的患者需要再次进行试纸检查,这使筛查策略的预期成本增加到每个患者 3.47 美元。在筛查策略中,每筛查 800 例患者可诊断出 1 例 CKD,增量成本效益比为每例诊断 2779.50 美元。

结论

尿试纸价格便宜,但它是一种检测 CKD 的效果不佳的筛查试验,对于初级保健医生来说是一种成本效益不佳的程序。这些数据支持了美国儿科学会关于使用筛查尿试纸干化学分析的指南的改变。临床医生必须考虑预防性保健程序的成本效益,以更好地利用现有资源。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验