Suppr超能文献

初始非手术治疗与急诊腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗急性复杂性阑尾炎的成本效果分析。

Cost-effectiveness analysis of initial nonoperative management versus emergency laparoscopic appendectomy for acute complicated appendicitis.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, National Hospital Organization Tochigi Medical Center, 1-10-37, Nakatomatsuri, Utsunomiya, Tochigi, 320-8580, Japan.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Nov 9;20(1):1019. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05839-6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of nonoperative management is growing. However, the best treatment strategy for acute complicated appendicitis remains controversial. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for complicated appendicitis patients. This study sought to determine the most cost-effective strategy from the health care-payer's perspective.

METHODS

The primary outcome was an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) using nonoperative management with or without interval laparoscopic appendectomy (ILA) as the intervention compared with operative management with emergency laparoscopic appendectomy (ELA) alone as the control. Model variables were abstracted from a literature review, and from data obtained from the hospital records of Tochigi Medical Center. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using an ICER. We constructed a Markov model to compare treatment strategies for complicated appendicitis in otherwise-healthy adults, over a time horizon of a single year. Uncertainty surrounding model parameters was assessed via one-way- and probabilistic-sensitivity analyses. Threshold analysis was performed using the willingness-to-pay threshold set at the World Health Organization's criterion of $107,690.

RESULTS

Three meta-analysis were included in our analysis. Operative management cost $6075 per patient. Nonoperative management with interval laparoscopic appendectomy (ILA) cost $984 more than operative management and produced only 0.005 more QALYs, resulting in an ICER of $182,587. Nonoperative management without ILA cost $235 more than operative management, and also yielded only 0.005 additional QALYs resulting in an ICER of $45,123 per QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis with 1000 draws resulted in average ICER of $172,992 in nonoperative management with ILA and $462,843 in Nonoperative management without ILA. The threshold analysis demonstrated that regardless of willingness-to-pay, nonoperative management without ILA would not be most cost-effective strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonoperative management with ILA and Nonoperative management without ILA were not cost-effective strategies compared with operative management to treat complicated appendicitis. Based on our findings, operative management remains the standard of care and nonoperative management would be reconsidered as a treatment option in complicated appendicitis from economic perspective.

摘要

背景

非手术治疗的安全性和有效性证据不断增加。然而,急性复杂阑尾炎的最佳治疗策略仍存在争议。我们旨在评估复杂阑尾炎患者治疗策略的成本效益。本研究旨在从医疗保健支付者的角度确定最具成本效益的策略。

方法

主要结果是使用非手术治疗与间隔腹腔镜阑尾切除术(ILA)的干预与单纯手术治疗与紧急腹腔镜阑尾切除术(ELA)的对照,比较增量成本效果比(ICER)。模型变量从文献综述和栃木医疗中心的医院记录中提取。使用 ICER 评估成本效益。我们构建了一个 Markov 模型,以比较在其他方面健康的成年人中复杂阑尾炎的治疗策略,时间范围为一年。通过单向和概率敏感性分析评估模型参数的不确定性。使用世界卫生组织 107690 美元的支付意愿阈值进行阈值分析。

结果

我们的分析包括三项荟萃分析。手术治疗每位患者费用为 6075 美元。非手术治疗与间隔腹腔镜阑尾切除术(ILA)比手术治疗多花费 984 美元,仅产生 0.005 个额外的 QALY,导致 ICER 为 182587 美元。非手术治疗不进行 ILA 比手术治疗多花费 235 美元,仅产生 0.005 个额外的 QALY,导致 ICER 为 45123 美元/ QALY。1000 次抽样的概率敏感性分析得出的平均 ICER 为非手术治疗加 ILA 为 172992 美元,非手术治疗不加 ILA 为 462843 美元。阈值分析表明,无论支付意愿如何,非手术治疗加 ILA 和非手术治疗不加 ILA 都不是治疗复杂阑尾炎的最具成本效益的策略。根据我们的研究结果,手术治疗仍然是标准治疗方法,从经济角度考虑,非手术治疗在复杂阑尾炎治疗中可以重新考虑作为一种治疗选择。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c61/7653840/630048be67d1/12913_2020_5839_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验