Suppr超能文献

[阿根廷可植入式心脏复律除颤器对猝死风险患者的成本效益分析]

[Cost effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for patients who are at risk for sudden death in Argentina].

作者信息

Alcaraz Andrea, González-Zuelgaray Jorge, Augustovski Federico

机构信息

Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria (IECS), Buenos Aires, Argentina.

出版信息

Value Health. 2011 Jul-Aug;14(5 Suppl 1):S33-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.05.030.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of the cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) among patients who are at risk for sudden death in Argentina, from three scenarios: public health, social security and private sector.

METHODS

We developed a Markov model to evaluate the survival, quality of life and cost of the prophylactic implantation of an ICD, as compared with pharmacological therapy, among three different target populations according to clinical trials selected using a systematic review, and choosing epidemiological, effectiveness, resource use and cost parameters. A healthcare system perspective was adopted. A 3% discount rate was used.

RESULTS

The use of the ICD was more costly and more effective than control therapy. The cohort with greater benefits was represented by MADIT I study, showing an incremental cost effectiveness rate (ICER) of $8,539 (dollar 2009) for public, $9,371 for social security and $10,083 for private sector. ICERs for secondary prevention population were $21,016, $22,520 and $24,012, and for MADIT II population were $17,379, $18,574 and $19,799. The analysis was robust to different deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, except for the cost of ICD and for battery life.

CONCLUSIONS

The results varied considerably depending on the cohort and discretely according to the health system. ICD could be cost-effective in Argentina, mainly in the MADIT I patients.

摘要

目的

从公共卫生、社会保障和私营部门三种情况,评估心脏复律除颤器(ICD)在阿根廷有猝死风险患者中的成本效益和成本效用。

方法

我们开发了一个马尔可夫模型,根据通过系统评价选择的临床试验,并选择流行病学、有效性、资源使用和成本参数,在三个不同目标人群中评估ICD预防性植入与药物治疗相比的生存率、生活质量和成本。采用医疗保健系统视角。使用3%的贴现率。

结果

与对照治疗相比,ICD的使用成本更高且更有效。获益更大的队列以MADIT I研究为代表,公共部门的增量成本效益率(ICER)为8539美元(2009年美元),社会保障部门为9371美元,私营部门为10083美元。二级预防人群的ICER分别为21016美元、22520美元和24012美元,MADIT II人群的ICER分别为17379美元、18574美元和19799美元。除ICD成本和电池寿命外,该分析对不同的确定性和概率敏感性分析具有稳健性。

结论

结果因队列不同而有很大差异,并根据卫生系统略有不同。在阿根廷,ICD可能具有成本效益,主要是在MADIT I患者中。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验