Suppr超能文献

整脊疗法治疗下腰痛和颈痛的成本效用分析。

Osteopathic care for low back pain and neck pain: A cost-utility analysis.

机构信息

Department of Public Health, Interuniversity Centre for Health Economics Research (I-CHER), Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; Department of Public Health, Interuniversity Centre for Health Economics Research (I-CHER), Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.

Department of Public Health, Interuniversity Centre for Health Economics Research (I-CHER), Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

出版信息

Complement Ther Med. 2018 Oct;40:207-213. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2018.06.001. Epub 2018 Jun 9.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to examine the health and economic consequences of osteopathic care for low back pain and neck pain in addition to usual care compared to usual care alone.

DESIGN

A decision tree model considering a one-year time horizon was applied. The analysis occurred from a health insurance perspective only considering direct medical costs. The health effects were expressed as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).

MAIN OUTCOMES

The main outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The uncertainty around key input parameters was addressed applying one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (5000 simulations).

RESULTS

For low back pain, osteopathy resulted in cost savings (€385.1 vs €501.8/patient) at improved QALYs (0.666 vs. 0.614) compared to usual care. For neck pain, osteopathy resulted in additional costs (€577.3 vs. €521.0) and improved QALYs (0.639 vs. 0.609) resulting in an ICER of €1,870/QALY. The one-way sensitivity analysis identified the hospitalization cost (back) and osteopathy cost (neck) as major cost drivers. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis resulted in an average net saving of €163 (95%CI-€260, -€49.1) and a QALY gain of 0.06 (95%CI -0.06, 0.17) for low back pain and an average additional cost of €55.1 (95%CI €20.9, €129) and improved QALY gain of 0.03 (95%CI-0.06, 0.12) for neck pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Osteopathy was found to be a 'dominant' (low back pain) and cost-effective strategy (neck pain) compared to usual care. Further health economic evaluation studies considering a broader range of cost items and longer time horizon are required.

摘要

目的

除常规护理外,比较整骨疗法对腰痛和颈痛的健康和经济影响。

设计

应用了考虑一年时间范围的决策树模型。该分析仅从健康保险的角度考虑直接医疗成本。健康效果以质量调整生命年(QALY)表示。

主要结果

主要结果是增量成本效益比(ICER)。通过进行单因素敏感性分析和概率敏感性分析(5000 次模拟),解决了关键输入参数的不确定性问题。

结果

对于腰痛,与常规护理相比,整骨疗法可节省成本(385.1 欧元对 501.8 欧元/患者),并提高 QALY(0.666 对 0.614)。对于颈痛,整骨疗法导致额外的成本(577.3 欧元对 521.0 欧元)和提高 QALY(0.639 对 0.609),导致 ICER 为 1870 欧元/QALY。单因素敏感性分析确定住院费用(背部)和整骨疗法费用(颈部)是主要成本驱动因素。概率敏感性分析结果表明,腰痛的平均净节省额为 163 欧元(95%CI-260,-49.1),QALY 增加 0.06(95%CI-0.06,0.17),颈痛的平均额外成本为 55.1 欧元(95%CI 20.9,129 欧元),QALY 增加 0.03(95%CI-0.06,0.12)。

结论

与常规护理相比,整骨疗法在腰痛方面是一种“占主导地位的”(低背部疼痛)和具有成本效益的策略(颈痛)。需要进一步进行考虑更广泛成本项目和更长时间范围的健康经济评估研究。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验