• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

长期空气湿化疗法对中重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病或支气管扩张症患者具有成本效益。

Long-term air humidification therapy is cost-effective for patients with moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or bronchiectasis.

机构信息

Health Outcomes Associates Ltd.; University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Biometrics Matters Limited, Hamilton, New Zealand.

出版信息

Value Health. 2014 Jun;17(4):320-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.01.007.

DOI:10.1016/j.jval.2014.01.007
PMID:24968990
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To establish the cost-effectiveness of long-term humidification therapy (LTHT) added to usual care for patients with moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or bronchiectasis.

METHODS

Resource usage in a 12-month clinical trial of LTHT was estimated from hospital records, patient diaries, and the equipment supplier. Health state utility values were derived from the St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score. All patients who remained in the trial for 12 months and who had at least 90 days of diary records were included (87 of 108).

RESULTS

Clinical costs were NZ $3973 (95% confidence interval [CI] $1614-$6332) for the control group and NZ $3331 (95% CI $948-$6920) for the intervention group. The mean health benefit per patient was -6.9 SGRQ units (95% CI -13.0 to -7.2; P < 0.05) or +0.0678 quality-adjusted life-years (95% CI 0.001-0.135). With the intervention costing NZ $2059 annually, the mean cost per quality-adjusted life-year was NZ $20,902 (US $18,907) and the bootstrap median was NZ $19,749 (2.5th percentile -$40,923, 97.5th percentile $221,275). At a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of NZ $30,000, the probability of cost-effectiveness was 61%, ranging from 49% to 72% as the cost of LTHT was varied by ±30%. At a WTP of NZ $20,000, the probability was 49% (range 34%-61%).

CONCLUSIONS

LTHT is moderately cost-effective for patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or bronchiectasis at a WTP threshold that is acceptable for public funding of medicines in New Zealand. These findings must be interpreted with caution because of the modest size of the clinical study, necessary lack of blinding in the clinical trial, and uncertainty in estimating health state utility from the SQRQ.

摘要

目的

评估长期湿化治疗(LTHT)联合常规治疗对中重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病或支气管扩张症患者的成本效果。

方法

从医院记录、患者日记和设备供应商处估算了为期 12 个月的 LTHT 临床试验中的资源使用情况。健康状态效用值来自圣乔治呼吸问卷(SGRQ)总分。所有在试验中持续 12 个月且日记记录至少 90 天的患者(108 例患者中的 87 例)都被纳入。

结果

对照组的临床成本为 3973 新西兰元(95%置信区间[CI]为 1614-6332 新西兰元),干预组为 3331 新西兰元(95%CI 为 948-6920 新西兰元)。每位患者的平均健康效益为-6.9 个 SGRQ 单位(95%CI-13.0 至-7.2;P<0.05)或 0.0678 个质量调整生命年(95%CI 0.001-0.135)。LTHT 每年的干预成本为 2059 新西兰元,每质量调整生命年的平均成本为 20902 新西兰元(2.5 百分位-40923 新西兰元,97.5 百分位 221275 新西兰元)。在支付意愿(WTP)阈值为 30000 新西兰元的情况下,成本效果的概率为 61%,随着 LTHT 成本变化±30%,概率范围为 49%至 72%。在 WTP 为 20000 新西兰元的情况下,概率为 49%(范围为 34%-61%)。

结论

在新西兰药品公共资金可接受的支付意愿阈值下,LTHT 对中重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病或支气管扩张症患者具有中等程度的成本效果。由于临床研究规模较小、临床试验中不可避免的缺乏盲法以及从 SQRQ 估算健康状态效用的不确定性,这些发现必须谨慎解释。

相似文献

1
Long-term air humidification therapy is cost-effective for patients with moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or bronchiectasis.长期空气湿化疗法对中重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病或支气管扩张症患者具有成本效益。
Value Health. 2014 Jun;17(4):320-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.01.007.
2
The clinical utility of long-term humidification therapy in chronic airway disease.慢性气道疾病中长期湿化治疗的临床实用性。
Respir Med. 2010 Apr;104(4):525-33. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2009.12.016. Epub 2010 Feb 9.
3
Estimating the cost-effectiveness of fluticasone propionate for treating chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the presence of missing data.在存在缺失数据的情况下估算丙酸氟替卡松治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病的成本效益。
Value Health. 2006 Jul-Aug;9(4):227-35. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00106.x.
4
Cost analysis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a tertiary care setting in Taiwan.台湾某三级医疗环境中慢性阻塞性肺疾病的成本分析。
Respirology. 2008 Sep;13(5):689-94. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1843.2008.01308.x. Epub 2008 May 29.
5
Cost effectiveness of telehealth for patients with long term conditions (Whole Systems Demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study): nested economic evaluation in a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial.长期病患者的远程医疗的成本效益(全系统示范远程医疗问卷调查研究):在一项实用的、集群随机对照试验中嵌套的经济评估。
BMJ. 2013 Mar 20;346:f1035. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f1035.
6
Cost-utility analysis of a telehealth programme for patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treated with long-term oxygen therapy.针对接受长期氧疗的重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者的远程医疗项目的成本效用分析。
J Telemed Telecare. 2014 Sep;20(6):307-16. doi: 10.1177/1357633X14544421. Epub 2014 Jul 22.
7
Probabilistic Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of bronchodilator therapy in COPD patients in different countries.用于评估不同国家慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者支气管扩张剂治疗成本效益的概率马尔可夫模型。
Value Health. 2005 Jan-Feb;8(1):32-46. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.03086.x.
8
Cost-effectiveness of early assisted discharge for COPD exacerbations in The Netherlands.荷兰早期辅助出院治疗 COPD 加重的成本效益。
Value Health. 2013 Jun;16(4):517-28. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.01.010. Epub 2013 May 3.
9
Cost-utility analysis of tiotropium versus usual care in patients with COPD in the UK and Belgium.在英国和比利时,对 COPD 患者使用噻托溴铵与常规护理的成本-效用分析。
Respir Med. 2012 Dec;106(12):1722-33. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2012.09.006. Epub 2012 Oct 3.
10
Is INTERdisciplinary COMmunity-based COPD management (INTERCOM) cost-effective?基于社区的跨学科慢性阻塞性肺疾病管理(INTERCOM)是否具有成本效益?
Eur Respir J. 2010 Jan;35(1):79-87. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00043309. Epub 2009 Jul 2.

引用本文的文献

1
Addressing sputum challenges in bronchiectasis: high-flow therapy as a game-changer for airway clearance care.应对支气管扩张症中的痰液难题:高流量疗法成为气道清除护理的变革性手段。
ERJ Open Res. 2025 Sep 8;11(5). doi: 10.1183/23120541.00648-2025. eCollection 2025 Sep.
2
A Real-Life Study of Combined Treatment with Long-Term Non-Invasive Ventilation and High Flow Nasal Cannula in Patients with End-Stage Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease.终末期慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者长期无创通气与高流量鼻导管联合治疗的真实世界研究
J Clin Med. 2023 Jul 4;12(13):4485. doi: 10.3390/jcm12134485.
3
Cost-Effectiveness of Humidified High-Flow Therapy (HHFT) for COPD Patients on Long-Term Oxygen Therapy.
长期氧疗的慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者使用高流量湿化氧疗(HHFT)的成本效益分析
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2023 Apr 5;15:239-250. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S400739. eCollection 2023.
4
The Danish respiratory society guideline for long-term high flow nasal cannula treatment, with or without supplementary oxygen.丹麦呼吸学会关于长期高流量鼻导管治疗(有无补充氧气)的指南。
Eur Clin Respir J. 2023 Feb 23;10(1):2178600. doi: 10.1080/20018525.2023.2178600. eCollection 2023.
5
Long-Term Domiciliary High-Flow Nasal Therapy in Patients with Bronchiectasis: A Preliminary Retrospective Observational Case-Control Study.支气管扩张症患者的长期家庭高流量鼻导管治疗:一项初步回顾性观察病例对照研究
J Clin Med. 2022 Dec 9;11(24):7323. doi: 10.3390/jcm11247323.
6
The effect of domiciliary high flow nasal cannula treatment on dyspnea and walking distance in patients with interstitial lung disease - A pilot study.家庭高流量鼻导管治疗对间质性肺疾病患者呼吸困难和行走距离的影响 - 一项初步研究。
Chron Respir Dis. 2022 Jan-Dec;19:14799731221137085. doi: 10.1177/14799731221137085.
7
Hospital Cost Savings for Sequential COPD Patients Receiving Domiciliary Nasal High Flow Therapy.序贯性 COPD 患者接受家庭用高流量鼻导管氧疗的医院成本节约。
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2022 Jun 3;17:1311-1322. doi: 10.2147/COPD.S350267. eCollection 2022.
8
Cost-Effectiveness of Domiciliary High Flow Nasal Cannula Treatment in COPD Patients with Chronic Respiratory Failure.家庭高流量鼻导管治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病合并慢性呼吸衰竭患者的成本效益分析
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2021 Jun 18;13:553-564. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S312523. eCollection 2021.
9
Clinical Evidence of Nasal High-Flow Therapy in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients.慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者鼻高流量治疗的临床证据。
Respiration. 2020;99(2):140-153. doi: 10.1159/000505583. Epub 2020 Jan 28.
10
Can cost-effectiveness results be combined into a coherent league table? Case study from one high-income country.能否将成本效益结果合并为一个连贯的排行榜?来自一个高收入国家的案例研究。
Popul Health Metr. 2019 Aug 5;17(1):10. doi: 10.1186/s12963-019-0192-x.