Jacklin Paul Brian, Maresh Michael Ja, Patterson Chris C, Stanley Katharine P, Dornhorst Anne, Burman-Roy Shona, Bilous Rudy W
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, London, UK.
St. Mary's Hospital, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
BMJ Open. 2017 Aug 11;7(8):e016621. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016621.
To compare the cost-effectiveness (CE) of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2015 and the WHO 2013 diagnostic thresholds for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).
The analysis was from the perspective of the National Health Service in England and Wales.
6221 patients from four of the Hyperglycaemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes (HAPO) study centres (two UK, two Australian), 6308 patients from the Atlantic Diabetes in Pregnancy study and 12 755 patients from UK clinical practice.
The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), net monetary benefit (NMB) and the probability of being cost-effective at CE thresholds of £20 000 and £30 000 per QALY.
In a population of pregnant women from the four HAPO study centres and using NICE-defined risk factors for GDM, diagnosing GDM using NICE 2015 criteria had an NMB of £239 902 (relative to no treatment) at a CE threshold of £30 000 per QALY compared with WHO 2013 criteria, which had an NMB of £186 675. NICE 2015 criteria had a 51.5% probability of being cost-effective compared with the WHO 2013 diagnostic criteria, which had a 27.6% probability of being cost-effective (no treatment had a 21.0% probability of being cost-effective). For women without NICE risk factors in this population, the NMBs for NICE 2015 and WHO 2013 criteria were both negative relative to no treatment and no treatment had a 78.1% probability of being cost-effective.
The NICE 2015 diagnostic criteria for GDM can be considered cost-effective relative to the WHO 2013 alternative at a CE threshold of £30 000 per QALY. Universal screening for GDM was not found to be cost-effective relative to screening based on NICE risk factors.
比较英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)2015年及世界卫生组织(WHO)2013年妊娠期糖尿病(GDM)诊断阈值的成本效益(CE)。
分析基于英格兰和威尔士国民医疗服务体系的视角。
来自高血糖与不良妊娠结局(HAPO)研究中心中四个中心(两个英国中心、两个澳大利亚中心)的6221名患者、来自大西洋妊娠糖尿病研究的6308名患者以及来自英国临床实践的12755名患者。
每质量调整生命年(QALY)的增量成本、净货币效益(NMB)以及在每QALY为20000英镑和30000英镑的CE阈值下具有成本效益的概率。
在来自四个HAPO研究中心的孕妇群体中,使用NICE定义的GDM风险因素,与WHO 2013年标准相比,采用NICE 2015年标准诊断GDM在每QALY为30000英镑的CE阈值下,净货币效益为239902英镑(相对于不治疗),而WHO 2013年标准的净货币效益为186675英镑。与WHO 2013年诊断标准相比,NICE 2015年标准具有成本效益的概率为51.5%,而WHO 2013年诊断标准具有成本效益的概率为27.6%(不治疗具有成本效益的概率为21.0%)。对于该群体中无NICE风险因素的女性,相对于不治疗,NICE 2015年和WHO 2013年标准的净货币效益均为负,且不治疗具有成本效益的概率为78.1%。
相对于WHO 2013年的替代标准,在每QALY为30000英镑的CE阈值下,NICE 2015年GDM诊断标准可被认为具有成本效益。相对于基于NICE风险因素的筛查,未发现GDM普遍筛查具有成本效益。