Zomer Ella, Osborn David, Nazareth Irwin, Blackburn Ruth, Burton Alexandra, Hardoon Sarah, Holt Richard Ian Gregory, King Michael, Marston Louise, Morris Stephen, Omar Rumana, Petersen Irene, Walters Kate, Hunter Rachael Maree
Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Department of Primary Care and Population Health, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
BMJ Open. 2017 Sep 5;7(9):e018181. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018181.
To determine the cost-effectiveness of two bespoke severe mental illness (SMI)-specific risk algorithms compared with standard risk algorithms for primary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention in those with SMI.
Primary care setting in the UK. The analysis was from the National Health Service perspective.
1000 individuals with SMI from The Health Improvement Network Database, aged 30-74 years and without existing CVD, populated the model.
Four cardiovascular risk algorithms were assessed: (1) general population lipid, (2) general population body mass index (BMI), (3) SMI-specific lipid and (4) SMI-specific BMI, compared against no algorithm. At baseline, each cardiovascular risk algorithm was applied and those considered high risk ( 10%) were assumed to be prescribed statin therapy while others received usual care.
Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs were accrued for each algorithm including no algorithm, and cost-effectiveness was calculated using the net monetary benefit (NMB) approach. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test assumptions made and uncertainty around parameter estimates.
The SMI-specific BMI algorithm had the highest NMB resulting in 15 additional QALYs and a cost saving of approximately £53 000 per 1000 patients with SMI over 10 years, followed by the general population lipid algorithm (13 additional QALYs and a cost saving of £46 000).
The general population lipid and SMI-specific BMI algorithms performed equally well. The ease and acceptability of use of an SMI-specific BMI algorithm (blood tests not required) makes it an attractive algorithm to implement in clinical settings.
确定两种定制的严重精神疾病(SMI)特异性风险算法与标准风险算法相比,在预防SMI患者原发性心血管疾病(CVD)方面的成本效益。
英国的初级保健机构。分析是从英国国家医疗服务体系的角度进行的。
来自健康改善网络数据库的1000名SMI患者,年龄在30 - 74岁之间且无现有CVD,纳入模型。
评估了四种心血管风险算法:(1)一般人群血脂算法,(2)一般人群体重指数(BMI)算法,(3)SMI特异性血脂算法,(4)SMI特异性BMI算法,与不使用算法进行比较。在基线时,应用每种心血管风险算法,那些被认为是高风险(≥10%)的患者假定接受他汀类药物治疗,而其他患者接受常规护理。
计算每种算法(包括不使用算法)的质量调整生命年(QALYs)和成本,并使用净货币效益(NMB)方法计算成本效益。进行确定性和概率性敏感性分析,以检验所做的假设以及参数估计周围的不确定性。
SMI特异性BMI算法的NMB最高,在10年期间,每1000名SMI患者可额外产生15个QALYs,成本节省约53000英镑,其次是一般人群血脂算法(额外13个QALYs,成本节省46000英镑)。
一般人群血脂算法和SMI特异性BMI算法表现同样良好。SMI特异性BMI算法使用简便且可接受性高(无需血液检测),使其成为临床环境中实施的有吸引力的算法。