Department of Otolaryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Department of Otolaryngology, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, MA.
Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2017 Nov;7(11):1035-1044. doi: 10.1002/alr.22013. Epub 2017 Sep 5.
The objective of this work was to evaluate the impact of asthma on the cost-effectiveness profile of endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) compared to medical therapy for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP).
The study design consisted of a cohort-style Markov decision-tree cost utility analysis with a 35-year time horizon. Matched cohorts of CRSwNP patients with (n = 95) and without (n = 95) asthma who underwent ESS were compared with cohorts of patients from the national Medical Expenditures Survey Panel (MEPS) database who underwent medical management for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Baseline, 1-year, and 2-year health utility values were calculated from responses to the EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) instrument in both cohorts. The primary outcome measure was the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) for each cohort.
The reference cases for CRSwNP patients with and without asthma yielded ICERs for ESS vs medical therapy alone of $12,066 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and $7,369 per QALY, respectively. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY, the ICER scatter plots demonstrated 86% and 99% certainty that the ESS strategy was the most cost-effective option for CRSwNP patients with and without asthma, respectively. ESS was not significantly more cost effective for CRSwNP patients without asthma (p = 0.494).
ESS remains cost effective compared to medical therapy for patients both with and without asthma. While the comorbidity of asthma results in an inferior ICER result, it does not result in a statistically significant negative impact on the overall cost effectiveness of ESS.
本研究旨在评估哮喘对内镜鼻窦手术(ESS)与药物治疗慢性鼻-鼻窦炎伴鼻息肉(CRSwNP)的成本效益比的影响。
该研究设计采用了队列式马尔可夫决策树成本效用分析,时间范围为 35 年。ESS 组纳入了 95 例伴哮喘的 CRSwNP 患者和 95 例不伴哮喘的 CRSwNP 患者,与来自国家医疗支出调查小组(MEPS)数据库中接受药物治疗的 CRS 患者进行了匹配。两组患者均采用 EQ-5D 量表评估健康效用值。主要结局指标为每个队列的增量成本效益比(ICER)。
伴哮喘和不伴哮喘的 CRSwNP 患者的参考病例得出 ESS 与单纯药物治疗相比的 ICER 分别为 12066 美元/QALY 和 7369 美元/QALY。在 50000 美元/QALY 的意愿支付阈值下,ICER 散点图显示 ESS 策略对伴哮喘和不伴哮喘的 CRSwNP 患者分别有 86%和 99%的可能性成为最具成本效益的选择。对于不伴哮喘的 CRSwNP 患者,ESS 并不显著更具成本效益(p = 0.494)。
对于伴或不伴哮喘的患者,ESS 均比药物治疗更具成本效益。虽然哮喘的合并症导致 ICER 结果较差,但不会对 ESS 的总体成本效益产生统计学上的负面影响。