Barth Cordula, Neusser Silke, Biermann Janine, Wasem Jürgen, Berg Thomas, Wiegand Johannes, Wolffram Ingmar, Petroff David, Aidelsburger Pamela, Grünbauer Alexandra, Neumann Anja
a Institute for Health Care Management and Research, University Duisburg-Essen , Essen , Germany.
b Section of Hepatology , University Leipzig , Leipzig , Germany.
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2018 Jan;53(1):76-82. doi: 10.1080/00365521.2017.1390599. Epub 2017 Oct 24.
Systematic screening for chronic hepatitis B and C does not yet exist in Germany. Therefore, the implementation of a screening approach within a preventive medical examination performed by primary care physicians ('Check-Up 35+') was evaluated in a recent prospective multicenter study. The present analysis estimates the financial consequences for the statutory health insurance by budget impact analysis.
A Markov cohort model was developed consisting of 21 health states. Four different screening scenarios derived from the previous multicenter study were compared to usual care, a strategy without screening for hepatitis. Actual cost data for Germany were calculated and systematic literature searches for all input parameters were performed.
The base case results in incremental costs for the screening strategies compared to no hepatitis screening of 165-227 € per patient in a 20-year horizon. Two main parameters influence the financial consequences: (A) detection and treatment increase the costs in the beginning. (B) Screening avoids hepatitis induced end-stage liver disease. The initial higher costs exceed the later savings. Sensitivity analyses demonstrate a strong impact of medication costs for the treatment of additionally detected hepatitis infections on the outcome. This finding is robust to sensitivity analysis.
The screening strategy proposed here implies additional costs for the statutory health insurance, however, a decision regarding its usefulness must consider criteria other than cost. For example, the high burden of disease due to liver cirrhosis and liver carcinoma should be considered. Therefore, an additional cost-effectiveness-analysis should be conducted.
德国尚未开展慢性乙型肝炎和丙型肝炎的系统筛查。因此,在最近一项前瞻性多中心研究中,对在初级保健医生进行的预防性体检(“35岁以上体检”)中实施筛查方法进行了评估。本分析通过预算影响分析估计法定医疗保险的财务后果。
建立了一个由21种健康状态组成的马尔可夫队列模型。将先前多中心研究得出的四种不同筛查方案与常规护理(一种不筛查肝炎的策略)进行比较。计算了德国的实际成本数据,并对所有输入参数进行了系统的文献检索。
在20年的时间范围内,与不进行肝炎筛查相比,基础病例中筛查策略的增量成本为每位患者165 - 227欧元。两个主要参数影响财务后果:(A)检测和治疗在开始时会增加成本。(B)筛查可避免肝炎导致的终末期肝病。最初较高的成本超过了后期的节省。敏感性分析表明,额外检测出的肝炎感染的治疗药物成本对结果有很大影响。这一发现对敏感性分析具有稳健性。
这里提出的筛查策略意味着法定医疗保险需要额外成本,然而,关于其有用性的决策必须考虑成本以外的标准。例如,应考虑肝硬化和肝癌导致的高疾病负担。因此,应进行额外的成本效益分析。