Gomes Manuel, Pennington Mark, Wittenberg Raphael, Knapp Martin, Black Nick, Smith Sarah
1 Assistant Professor of Health Economics, Department of Health Services Research & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, UK.
2 Senior Lecturer in Health Economics, King's Health Economics, King's College London, UK.
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2017 Oct;22(4):226-235. doi: 10.1177/1355819617714816. Epub 2017 Jun 16.
Background Policy makers in England advocate referral of patients with suspected dementia to Memory Assessment Services (MAS), but it is unclear how any improvement in patients' health-related quality of life (HRQL) compares with the associated costs. Aims To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MAS for the diagnosis and follow-up care of patients with suspected dementia. Method We analysed observational data from 1318 patients referred to 69 MAS, and their lay carers (n = 944), who completed resource use and HRQL questionnaires at baseline, three and six months. We reported mean differences in HRQL (disease-specific DEMQOL and generic EQ-5D-3L), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs between baseline and six months after referral to MAS. We also assessed the cost-effectiveness of MAS across different patient subgroups and clinic characteristics. Results Referral to MAS was associated with gains in DEMQOL (mean gain: 3.48, 95% confidence interval: 2.84 to 4.12), EQ-5D-3L (0.023, 0.008 to 0.038) and QALYs (0.006, 0.002 to 0.01). Mean total cost over six months, assuming a societal perspective, was £1899 (£1277 to £2539). This yielded a negative incremental net monetary benefit of -£1724 (-£2388 to -£1085), assuming NICE's recommended willingness-to-pay threshold (£30,000 per QALY). These base case results were relatively robust to alternative assumptions about costs and HRQL. There was some evidence that patients aged 80 or older benefitted more from referral to MAS (p < 0.01 from adjusted mean differences in net benefits) compared to younger patients. MAS with over 75 new patients a month or cost per patient less than £2500 over six months were relatively more cost-effective (p < 0.01) than MAS with fewer new monthly patients or higher cost per patient. Conclusions Diagnosis, treatment and follow-up care provided by MAS to patients with suspected dementia appears to be effective, but not cost-effective, in the six months after diagnosis. Longer term evidence is required before drawing conclusions about the cost-effectiveness of MAS.
英国的政策制定者主张将疑似痴呆症患者转诊至记忆评估服务机构(MAS),但尚不清楚患者健康相关生活质量(HRQL)的任何改善与相关成本相比情况如何。
评估MAS对疑似痴呆症患者进行诊断和后续护理的成本效益。
我们分析了1318名转诊至69个MAS的患者及其非专业护理人员(n = 944)的观察数据,他们在基线、三个月和六个月时完成了资源使用和HRQL问卷。我们报告了转诊至MAS后基线和六个月之间HRQL(特定疾病的DEMQOL和通用的EQ-5D-3L)、质量调整生命年(QALYs)和成本的平均差异。我们还评估了MAS在不同患者亚组和诊所特征中的成本效益。
转诊至MAS与DEMQOL(平均增益:3.48,95%置信区间:2.84至4.12)、EQ-5D-3L(0.023,0.008至0.038)和QALYs(0.006,0.002至0.01)的增益相关。假设从社会角度来看,六个月的平均总成本为1899英镑(1277英镑至2539英镑)。假设采用英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)建议的支付意愿阈值(每QALY 30000英镑),这产生了-1724英镑(-2388英镑至-1085英镑)的负增量净货币效益。这些基础案例结果对于成本和HRQL的替代假设相对稳健。有一些证据表明,80岁及以上的患者与年轻患者相比,从转诊至MAS中获益更多(根据净效益的调整后平均差异,p < 0.01)。每月有超过75名新患者或六个月内每位患者成本低于2500英镑的MAS比每月新患者较少或每位患者成本较高的MAS相对更具成本效益(p < 0.01)。
MAS为疑似痴呆症患者提供的诊断、治疗和后续护理在诊断后的六个月内似乎是有效的,但不具有成本效益。在得出关于MAS成本效益的结论之前,需要长期证据。