Verdoorn Sanne, van de Pol Jeroen, Hövels Anke M, Kwint Henk-Frans, Blom Jeanet W, Gussekloo Jacobijn, Bouvy Marcel L
Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
SIR Institute for Pharmacy Practice and Policy, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2021 Feb;87(2):588-597. doi: 10.1111/bcp.14421. Epub 2020 Jun 30.
The ageing society may lead to increasing healthcare expenditure. A clinical medication review (CMR) could potentially reduce costs. The aim of this study is to perform a cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis from a societal perspective of a patient-centred CMR.
A trial-based cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis was performed as part of the DREAMeR study, a pragmatic controlled trial that randomised patients aged ≥70 years using at least seven drugs to either CMR or usual care. Over six months, healthcare consumption and drug use were collected to estimate costs, and effects were collected in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) measured with EQ-5D-5 L and EQ-VAS and as reduced health-related complaints with impact on patients' daily lives.
The total mean costs per patient (n = 588) over six months were €4,189 ± 6,596 for the control group (n = 294) and €4,008 ± 6,678 for the intervention group (n = 294), including estimated intervention costs of €199 ± 67, which resulted in a mean incremental total cost savings of €181 for the intervention group compared to the control group. Compared to the control group, for the intervention group, the mean incremental QALYs over six months were: -0.00217 measured with EQ-5D and 0.003 measured with EQ-VAS. The incremental effect of reduced health-related complaints with impact was -0.34. There was a likelihood of >90% that the intervention was cost-saving.
The benefits of a patient-centred CMR were inconsistent with no benefits on HR-QoL measured with EQ-5D-5 L and small benefits on HR-QoL measured with EQ-VAS and health-related complaints with impact on patients' daily lives. Additionally, a CMR could potentially be cost saving from a societal perspective.
老龄化社会可能导致医疗保健支出增加。临床用药审查(CMR)可能会降低成本。本研究的目的是从以患者为中心的CMR的社会角度进行成本效用和成本效益分析。
作为DREAMeR研究的一部分,进行了基于试验的成本效用和成本效益分析,DREAMeR研究是一项实用的对照试验,将年龄≥70岁且使用至少七种药物的患者随机分为CMR组或常规护理组。在六个月的时间里,收集医疗保健消费和药物使用情况以估算成本,并收集以EQ-5D-5L和EQ-VAS测量的质量调整生命年(QALY)以及对患者日常生活有影响的与健康相关的投诉减少情况等效果指标。
对照组(n = 294)的每位患者在六个月内的总平均成本为4189±6596欧元,干预组(n = 294)为4008±6678欧元,包括估计的干预成本199±67欧元,与对照组相比,干预组的平均增量总成本节省了181欧元。与对照组相比,干预组在六个月内的平均增量QALY为:用EQ-5D测量为-0.00217,用EQ-VAS测量为0.003。对患者日常生活有影响的与健康相关投诉减少的增量效果为-0.34。干预措施有超过90%的可能性节省成本。
以患者为中心的CMR的益处与使用EQ-5D-5L测量的健康相关生活质量无益处、使用EQ-VAS测量的健康相关生活质量有小益处以及对患者日常生活有影响的与健康相关投诉减少不一致。此外,从社会角度来看,CMR可能会节省成本。