Centre on Population Approaches for Non-Communicable Disease Prevention, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.
Health Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Jul 16;19(1):489. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4292-x.
PRIMEtime CE is a multistate life table model that can directly compare the cost effectiveness of public health interventions affecting diet and physical activity levels, helping to inform decisions about how to spend finite resources. This paper estimates the costs and health outcomes in England of two scenarios: reformulating salt and expanding subsidised access to leisure centres. The results are used to help validate PRIMEtime CE, following the steps outlined in the Assessment of the Validation Status of Health-Economic decision models (AdViSHE) tool.
The PRIMEtime CE model estimates the difference in quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and difference in NHS and social care costs of modelled interventions compared with doing nothing. The salt reformulation scenario models how salt consumption would change if food producers met the 2017 UK Food Standards Agency salt reformulation targets. The leisure centre scenario models change in physical activity levels if the Birmingham Be Active scheme (where swimming pools and gym access is free to residents during defined periods) was rolled out across England. The AdViSHE tool was developed by health economic modellers and divides model validation into five parts: validation of the conceptual model, input data validation, validation of computerised model, operational validation, and other validation techniques. PRIMEtime CE is discussed in relation to each part.
Salt reformulation was dominant compared with doing nothing, and had a 10-year return on investment of £1.44 (£0.50 to £2.94) for every £1 spent. By contrast, over 10 years the Be Active expansion would cost £727,000 (£514,000 to £1,064,000) per QALY. PRIMEtime CE has good face validity of its conceptual model and has robust input data. Cross-validation produces mixed results and shows the impact of model scope, input parameters, and model structure on cost-per-QALY estimates.
This paper illustrates how PRIMEtime CE can be used to compare the cost-effectiveness of two different public health measures affecting diet and physical activity levels. The AdViSHE tool helps to validate PRIMEtime CE, identifies some of the key drivers of model estimates, and highlights the challenges of externally validating public health economic models against independent data.
PRIMEtime CE 是一个多州生命表模型,可直接比较影响饮食和身体活动水平的公共卫生干预措施的成本效益,有助于为如何利用有限资源提供决策依据。本文估计了英格兰两种情景下的成本和健康结果:调整盐含量和扩大补贴以获得休闲中心的途径。使用这些结果来帮助根据评估卫生经济决策模型验证状态(AdViSHE)工具概述的步骤验证 PRIMEtime CE。
PRIMEtime CE 模型估计与不采取任何措施相比,模型干预措施的质量调整生命年(QALY)差异和 NHS 和社会保健成本差异。盐含量调整情景模拟如果食品生产商达到 2017 年英国食品标准局的盐含量调整目标,盐的消耗量将如何变化。休闲中心情景模拟如果伯明翰“积极活动”计划(在规定期间,游泳池和健身房向居民免费开放)在英格兰全面铺开,身体活动水平将如何变化。AdViSHE 工具由健康经济建模者开发,将模型验证分为五个部分:概念模型验证、输入数据验证、计算机模型验证、操作验证和其他验证技术。讨论了 PRIMEtime CE 与每个部分的关系。
与不采取任何措施相比,盐含量调整具有优势,每花费 1 英镑,10 年内投资回报率为 1.44 英镑(0.50 至 2.94 英镑)。相比之下,在 10 年内,Be Active 扩展将花费 727,000 英镑(514,000 至 1,064,000 英镑)/QALY。PRIMEtime CE 的概念模型具有良好的表面有效性,并且具有可靠的输入数据。交叉验证产生了混合结果,并显示了模型范围、输入参数和模型结构对每 QALY 成本估计的影响。
本文说明了如何使用 PRIMEtime CE 比较影响饮食和身体活动水平的两种不同公共卫生措施的成本效益。AdViSHE 工具有助于验证 PRIMEtime CE,确定模型估计的一些关键驱动因素,并强调了针对独立数据验证公共卫生经济模型的挑战。