McAnany Steven J, Merrill Robert K, Overley Samuel C, Kim Jun S, Brochin Robert L, Qureshi Sheeraz A
Washington University, St Louis, MO, USA.
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Global Spine J. 2018 Feb;8(1):32-39. doi: 10.1177/2192568217726283. Epub 2017 Aug 17.
Cost-effectiveness analysis.
To determine the 7-year cost-effectiveness of cervical disc replacement (CDR) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).
We analyzed 7-year Short Form-36 Health Survey data collected from the Prestige Cervical Disc investigational device exemption study (IDE). The SF-6D algorithm was used to convert this data into health state utilities. Costs were calculated from the payer perspective, and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to represent effectiveness. A Markov transition-state model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of single-level CDR versus ACDF, and a Monte Carlo simulation was performed to assess the probabilistic sensitivity of the model.
CDR generated a 7-year cost of $172 989 compared to a 7-year cost of $143 714 for ACDF. CDR generated 4.53 QALYs compared to 3.85 QALYs generated by ACDF. The cost-effectiveness ratio of CDR was $38 247/QALY, while the cost-effectiveness ratio of ACDF was $37 325/QALY. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CDR was $43 522/QALY, under the willingness to pay threshold of $50 000/QALY. Our probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated CDR would be chosen 56% of the time based on 10 000 simulations.
Single-level CDR and ACDF were both cost-effective strategies at 7 years for treating degenerative conditions of the cervical spine. Both the Markov simulation and the Monte Carlo simulation demonstrate CDR to be the more cost-effective strategy at 7 years. Continued analysis of IDE data should be performed to validate long-term cost-effectiveness of these treatment strategies.
成本效益分析。
确定颈椎间盘置换术(CDR)和颈椎前路椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)的7年成本效益。
我们分析了从Prestige颈椎间盘研究性器械豁免研究(IDE)中收集的7年36项简短健康调查数据。使用SF - 6D算法将这些数据转换为健康状态效用值。从支付方角度计算成本,并使用质量调整生命年(QALY)来表示有效性。采用马尔可夫转移状态模型评估单节段CDR与ACDF的成本效益,并进行蒙特卡罗模拟以评估模型的概率敏感性。
CDR的7年成本为172,989美元,而ACDF的7年成本为143,714美元。CDR产生4.53个QALY,而ACDF产生3.85个QALY。CDR的成本效益比为38,247美元/QALY,而ACDF的成本效益比为37,325美元/QALY。CDR的增量成本效益比为43,522美元/QALY,低于50,000美元/QALY的支付意愿阈值。我们的概率敏感性分析表明,基于10,000次模拟,CDR在56%的情况下会被选择。
单节段CDR和ACDF在治疗颈椎退行性疾病方面都是7年具有成本效益的策略。马尔可夫模拟和蒙特卡罗模拟均表明CDR在7年时是更具成本效益的策略。应继续对IDE数据进行分析,以验证这些治疗策略的长期成本效益。