Health Economics Unit, Institute of Applied Health Research, Public Health Building, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Faculty of Public Health and Policy, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018 Nov 1;73(11):3189-3198. doi: 10.1093/jac/dky309.
Overprescribing of antibiotics by general practitioners (GPs) is seen as a major driver of antibiotic resistance. Training in communication skills and C-reactive protein (CRP) testing both appear effective in reducing such prescribing. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness (compared with usual care) of: (i) training GPs in the use of CRP testing; (ii) training GPs in communication skills; and (iii) training GPs in both CRP testing and communication skills.
Economic analyses [cost-utility analysis (CUA) accounting for the cost of antibiotic resistance and cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA)] were both conducted from a healthcare perspective with a time horizon of 28 days alongside a multinational, cluster, randomized, factorial controlled trial in patients with respiratory tract infections in five European countries. The primary outcome measures were QALYs and percentage reduction in antibiotic prescribing. Hierarchical modelling was used to estimate an incremental cost per QALY gained and an incremental cost per percentage reduction in antibiotic prescribing.
Overall, the results of both the CUA and CEA showed that training in communication skills is the most cost-effective option. However, excluding the cost of antibiotic resistance in the CUA resulted in usual care being the most cost-effective option. Country-specific results from the CUA showed that training in communication skills was cost-effective in Belgium, UK and Netherlands whilst training in CRP was cost-effective in Poland.
Internet-based training in communication skills is a cost-effective intervention to reduce antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections in primary care if the cost of antibiotic resistance is accounted for.
全科医生(GP)过度开具抗生素被视为抗生素耐药性的主要驱动因素。沟通技巧培训和 C 反应蛋白(CRP)检测都被证明可以有效减少这种处方。本研究评估了以下三种方法的成本效益(与常规护理相比):(i)培训 GP 使用 CRP 检测;(ii)培训 GP 沟通技巧;(iii)培训 GP 使用 CRP 检测和沟通技巧。
经济分析(考虑抗生素耐药性成本的成本效用分析(CUA)和成本效果分析(CEA))均从医疗保健角度进行,时间范围为 28 天,同时在五个欧洲国家进行了一项多国家、集群、随机、因子对照试验,涉及呼吸道感染患者。主要结果测量指标是 QALYs 和抗生素处方减少的百分比。分层模型用于估计每获得一个 QALY 的增量成本和每减少抗生素处方的百分比的增量成本。
总体而言,CUA 和 CEA 的结果均表明,沟通技巧培训是最具成本效益的选择。然而,在 CUA 中排除抗生素耐药性的成本会导致常规护理成为最具成本效益的选择。CUA 的国家特定结果表明,在比利时、英国和荷兰,沟通技巧培训是具有成本效益的,而在波兰,CRP 培训是具有成本效益的。
如果考虑到抗生素耐药性的成本,基于互联网的沟通技巧培训是减少初级保健中呼吸道感染抗生素处方的一种具有成本效益的干预措施。