Suppr超能文献

在美国,非心脏手术全身麻醉维持中使用异丙酚(得普利麻)与吸入麻醉剂的成本效益比较。

Cost-Effectiveness of Propofol (Diprivan) Versus Inhalational Anesthetics to Maintain General Anesthesia in Noncardiac Surgery in the United States.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University Hospital of Muenster, Muenster, Germany.

Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency Medicine, Transfusion Medicine, and Pain Therapy, Protestant Hospital of the Bethel Foundation, University Hospital OWL, Campus Bielefeld-Bethel, Bielefeld, Germany.

出版信息

Value Health. 2021 Jul;24(7):939-947. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2021.01.008. Epub 2021 Apr 1.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

It is not known whether using propofol total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) to reduce incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is cost-effective. We assessed the economic impact of propofol TIVA versus inhalational anesthesia in adult patients for ambulatory and inpatient procedures relevant to the US healthcare system.

METHODS

Two models simulate individual patient pathways through inpatient and ambulatory surgery with propofol TIVA or inhalational anesthesia with economic inputs from studies on adult surgical US patients. Efficacy inputs were obtained from a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses assessed the robustness of the model estimates.

RESULTS

Lower PONV rate, shorter stay in the post-anesthesia care unit, and reduced need for rescue antiemetics offset the higher costs for anesthetics, analgesics, and muscle relaxants with propofol TIVA and reduced cost by 11.41 ± 10.73 USD per patient in the inpatient model and 11.25 ± 9.81 USD in the ambulatory patient model. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated strong robustness of the results.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintenance of general anesthesia with propofol was cost-saving compared to inhalational anesthesia in both inpatient and ambulatory surgical settings in the United States. These economic results support current guideline recommendations, which endorse propofol TIVA to reduce PONV risk and enhance postoperative recovery.

摘要

目的

目前尚不清楚使用丙泊酚全凭静脉麻醉(TIVA)是否能降低术后恶心和呕吐(PONV)的发生率,是否具有成本效益。我们评估了丙泊酚 TIVA 与吸入麻醉在与美国医疗保健系统相关的门诊和住院手术中对成人患者的经济影响。

方法

两个模型模拟了使用丙泊酚 TIVA 或吸入麻醉的住院和门诊手术中个体患者的路径,其经济投入来自对美国成年手术患者的研究。疗效投入来自随机对照试验的荟萃分析。概率和确定性敏感性分析评估了模型估计的稳健性。

结果

PONV 发生率较低、麻醉后监护病房停留时间较短、需要使用止吐药的情况减少,抵消了丙泊酚 TIVA 的麻醉剂、镇痛药和肌肉松弛剂成本较高的情况,使住院患者模型中的每位患者成本降低 11.41 ± 10.73 美元,门诊患者模型中的每位患者成本降低 11.25 ± 9.81 美元。敏感性分析表明,结果具有很强的稳健性。

结论

与吸入麻醉相比,在住院和门诊手术环境中,使用丙泊酚维持全身麻醉在成本上具有优势。这些经济结果支持了当前的指南建议,即支持使用丙泊酚 TIVA 降低 PONV 风险并促进术后恢复。

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