Harvey Michael J, Gaies Michael G, Prosser Lisa A
Department of Health Management and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-2029, USA,
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2015 Aug;13(4):341-57. doi: 10.1007/s40258-015-0170-9.
The in-hospital costs of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) have not been well established.
To evaluate the in-hospital costs of ECMO technology in both US and non-US settings for all patient types.
Systematic review of English-language articles, using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and EconLit databases. Searches consisted of the terms 'ECMO' AND 'health expenditures' or 'resource use' or 'costs' or 'cost analysis' or 'cost(-)effectiveness' or 'cost(-)benefit' or 'cost(-)utility' or 'economic(-)evaluation' or 'economic' or 'QALY' or 'cost per quality-adjusted life year'.
Only full scientific research articles were included. The exclusion criteria included papers that focused on pumpless ECMO, simulation training or decision support systems; papers that did not include human subjects or were not written in English; papers that did not mention ECMO, costs, economics or resource utilization; and papers that included only outside-hospital, infrastructure capital or device capital costs.
Data extraction was completed by one author, using predefined criteria.
From the database searches, 1371 results were returned, 226 records underwent a full review and 18 studies were included in the final review. Three papers studied adult populations, two studied adult and paediatric populations, five studied only paediatric populations, one studied a paediatric and neonatal population, and the remaining seven exclusively examined ECMO in neonatal populations. The sample sizes ranged from 8 to 8753 patients. ECMO for respiratory conditions was the most common diagnosis category, followed by congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) and then cardiac conditions. Most papers (n = 14) used retrospective cost collection. Only eight papers stated the perspective of the cost analysis. The results show a large variation in the cost of ECMO over multiple cost categories (e.g., range of total in-hospital costs of treatment: USD 42,554-537,554 [in 2013 values]). In the U.S.A., the reported costs of ECMO were highest for CDH repair, followed by cardiac conditions, and lowest for respiratory conditions. The US charges were highest for cardiac conditions. Outside the U.S.A., the ECMO cost was highest for cardiac conditions, followed by respiratory conditions, and lowest for CDH repair. No non-US studies reported charges.
The current literature shows that a large variation exists in the in-hospital cost estimates for ECMO. Further research is needed to understand how the diagnosis, setting and other factors relate to this variation in the cost of this technology. Reliable costing methodologies and cost information will be critical to inform policymakers and stakeholders wishing to maximize the value of advanced medical technologies such as ECMO.
体外膜肺氧合(ECMO)的住院费用尚未明确。
评估美国和非美国地区针对所有患者类型的ECMO技术住院费用。
对英文文章进行系统综述,使用PubMed、Embase、Web of Science和EconLit数据库。检索词包括“ECMO”以及“医疗支出”或“资源使用”或“成本”或“成本分析”或“成本效益”或“成本效益比”或“成本效用”或“经济评估”或“经济”或“质量调整生命年”或“每质量调整生命年成本”。
仅纳入完整的科研文章。排除标准包括专注于无泵ECMO、模拟培训或决策支持系统的论文;未纳入人类受试者或非英文撰写的论文;未提及ECMO、成本、经济学或资源利用的论文;以及仅包括院外、基础设施资本或设备资本成本的论文。
由一位作者使用预定义标准完成数据提取。
通过数据库检索,返回1371条结果,226条记录进行了全面审查,18项研究纳入最终审查。3篇论文研究成年人群,2篇研究成年和儿科人群,5篇仅研究儿科人群,1篇研究儿科和新生儿人群,其余7篇专门研究新生儿人群中的ECMO。样本量从8至8753例患者不等。呼吸疾病的ECMO是最常见的诊断类别,其次是先天性膈疝(CDH),然后是心脏疾病。大多数论文(n = 14)采用回顾性成本收集。仅有8篇论文说明了成本分析的视角。结果显示,ECMO在多个成本类别中的成本差异很大(例如,治疗的住院总费用范围:42,554 - 537,554美元[2013年价值])。在美国,报告的ECMO费用中CDH修复最高,其次是心脏疾病,呼吸疾病最低。美国心脏疾病的收费最高。在美国以外地区,ECMO成本心脏疾病最高,其次是呼吸疾病,CDH修复最低。没有非美国的研究报告收费情况。
当前文献表明,ECMO的住院费用估计存在很大差异。需要进一步研究以了解诊断、环境和其他因素如何与该技术成本的这种差异相关。可靠的成本核算方法和成本信息对于为希望最大化ECMO等先进医疗技术价值的政策制定者和利益相关者提供信息至关重要。