MacKenzie Ellen J, Weir Sharada, Rivara Frederick P, Jurkovich Gregory J, Nathens Avery B, Wang Weiwei, Scharfstein Daniel O, Salkever David S
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg, School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland 21205, USA.
J Trauma. 2010 Jul;69(1):1-10. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181e03a21.
The cost of trauma center care is high, raising questions about the value of a regionalized approach to trauma care. To address these concerns, we estimate 1-year and lifetime treatment costs and measure the cost-effectiveness of treatment at a Level I trauma center (TC) compared with a nontrauma center hospital (NTC).
Estimates of cost-effectiveness were derived using data on 5,043 major trauma patients enrolled in the National Study on Costs and Outcomes of Trauma, a prospective cohort study of severely injured adult patients cared for in 69 hospitals in 14 states. Data on costs were derived from multiple sources including claims data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, UB92 hospital bills, and patient interviews. Cost-effectiveness was estimated as the ratio of the difference in costs (for treatment at a TC vs. NTC) divided by the difference in life years gained (and lives saved). We also measured cost-effectiveness per quality-adjusted life year gained where quality of life was measured using the SF-6D. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting to adjust for observable differences between patients treated at TCs and NTCs.
The added cost for treatment at a TC versus NTC was $36,319 per life-year gained ($790,931 per life saved) and $36,961 per quality-adjusted life years gained. Cost-effectiveness was more favorable for patients with injuries of higher versus lower severity and for younger versus older patients.
Our findings provide evidence that regionalization of trauma care is not only effective but also it is cost-effective.
创伤中心的治疗费用高昂,这引发了对于创伤护理区域化方法价值的质疑。为解决这些担忧,我们估算了1年和终身治疗费用,并衡量了与非创伤中心医院(NTC)相比,一级创伤中心(TC)的治疗成本效益。
成本效益估算来自于参加全国创伤成本与结果研究的5043例主要创伤患者的数据,这是一项对14个州69家医院收治的重伤成年患者进行的前瞻性队列研究。成本数据来自多个来源,包括医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心的理赔数据、UB92医院账单以及患者访谈。成本效益估算为成本差异(TC与NTC治疗)除以获得的生命年差异(以及挽救的生命)。我们还衡量了每获得一个质量调整生命年的成本效益,其中生活质量使用SF-6D进行测量。我们使用治疗权重的逆概率来调整TC和NTC治疗患者之间的可观察差异。
与NTC相比,TC治疗的额外成本为每获得一个生命年36,319美元(每挽救一条生命790,931美元),每获得一个质量调整生命年36,961美元。对于重伤与轻伤患者以及年轻与老年患者,成本效益更为有利。
我们的研究结果提供了证据,表明创伤护理区域化不仅有效,而且具有成本效益。