Suppr超能文献

润肤剂预防特应性皮炎复发的成本效益

Cost Effectiveness of Emollients in the Prevention of Relapses in Atopic Dermatitis.

作者信息

Cabout Elise, Eymere Sebastien, Launois Robert, Aslanian Flavia, Taïeb Charles, Seité Sophie

机构信息

Réseau d'évaluation en Économie de la Santé (REES), Paris, France.

Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.

出版信息

Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2020 Dec 21;13:987-996. doi: 10.2147/CCID.S279233. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is chronic inflammatory skin condition, characterized by its remission-relapse cycles. This predominantly pediatric disease is becoming more and more prevalent. Emollients are part of the therapeutic management and particularly a way to increase time between relapses. The follow-up of AD and relapses have a great impact on patient's quality of life, expenditures and society costs. The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of different emollients prescribed to AD patients.

METHODS

A three-state Markov simulation model was developed over a six-year period with 28 days cycles. Two perspectives were adopted, a health care system perspective and a societal perspective. Four different emollients (A, B, C, D) were compared with no emollient use. Time without flare-up was the key endpoint of the study. quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) were assessed as a secondary outcome. Cost and effectiveness data were derived from (i) randomized clinical trials and literature review for the efficacy of treatments, (ii) resource utilization and quality of life data, and (iii) unit prices from official price lists.

RESULTS

The six-year health care costs associated with emollient A amount to £1844.23 and generate 4.58 years-without flare-up. Compared to emollient B, emollient A is costlier (Δ £41) but more effective (0.097 years). The ICER is £428.30 per year without flare-up. Emollient A is the dominant strategy compared to no treatment (£2,251.01; 3.99 years without flare-ups). When accounting for the societal costs, emollient A is the dominant strategy.

DISCUSSION

According to the analysis, treatment with preventive emollient was a cost-effective option compared with no treatment in adult AD patients. In this comparative study, emollient A is the most efficient strategy from a willingness to pay £200 with a probability of 49%.

摘要

引言

特应性皮炎(AD)是一种慢性炎症性皮肤病,其特点是有缓解-复发周期。这种主要发生在儿童中的疾病正变得越来越普遍。润肤剂是治疗管理的一部分,特别是一种延长复发间隔时间的方法。AD及其复发的随访对患者的生活质量、支出和社会成本有很大影响。本研究的目的是评估给AD患者开不同润肤剂的成本效益。

方法

建立了一个为期六年、周期为28天的三状态马尔可夫模拟模型。采用了两个视角,即医疗保健系统视角和社会视角。将四种不同的润肤剂(A、B、C、D)与不使用润肤剂进行比较。无发作时间是该研究的关键终点。质量调整生命年(QALYs)作为次要结果进行评估。成本和效果数据来自:(i)关于治疗效果的随机临床试验和文献综述;(ii)资源利用和生活质量数据;(iii)官方价格表中的单价。

结果

与润肤剂A相关的六年医疗保健成本为1844.23英镑,可产生4.58年无发作时间。与润肤剂B相比,润肤剂A成本更高(相差41英镑)但更有效(多0.097年)。增量成本效果比为每年无发作428.30英镑。与不治疗相比(2251.01英镑;3.99年无发作),润肤剂A是主导策略。考虑社会成本时,润肤剂A也是主导策略。

讨论

根据分析,在成年AD患者中,预防性使用润肤剂治疗与不治疗相比是一种具有成本效益的选择。在这项比较研究中,从支付意愿为200英镑、概率为49%来看,润肤剂A是最有效的策略。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/45a9/7762264/3208b26840ef/CCID-13-987-g0001.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