Lebenbaum Michael, Hassan S Ahmed
Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation (IHPME), University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Canadian Centre for Health Economics, Toronto, ON, Canada.
MDM Policy Pract. 2024 Jun 19;9(1):23814683241260423. doi: 10.1177/23814683241260423. eCollection 2024 Jan-Jun.
Global climate change is resulting in dramatic increases in wildfires. Individuals exposed to wildfires experience a high burden of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and the cost-effectiveness of the treatment options to address PTSD from wildfires has not been studied. The objective of this study was to conduct a cost-utility analysis comparing screening followed by treatment with paroxetine or trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT) versus no screening in Canadian adult wildfire evacuees. Using a Markov model, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs were evaluated over a 5-y time horizon using health care and societal perspectives. All costs and utilities in the model were discounted at 1.5%. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses examined the uncertainty in the incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) under a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000. From a societal perspective, no screening (NMB = $177,641) was dominated by screening followed by treatment with paroxetine (NMB = $180,733) and TF-CBT (NMB = $181,787), with TF-CBT having the highest likelihood of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY (probability = 0.649). The initial prevalence of PTSD, probability of acceptance of treatment, and costs of productivity had the largest impact on the INMB of both paroxetine or TF-CBT versus no screening. Neither intervention was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY from a health care perspective. Screening followed by treatment with paroxetine or TF-CBT compared with no screening was found to be cost-saving while providing additional QALYs in wildfire evacuees. Governments should consider funding screening programs for PTSD followed by treatment with TF-CBT for wildfire evacuees.
Two prior studies examined the cost-effectiveness of screening followed by treatment for PTSD among individuals exposed to other disaster-type events (i.e., terrorist attack and Hurricane Sandy) and found screening followed by treatment (i.e., cognitive behavioral therapy [CBT]) to be highly cost-effective.Among wildfire evacuees, screening followed by treatment with paroxetine or trauma-focused (TF)-CBT provides additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and is cost-saving from a societal perspective. TF-CBT was the treatment option found most likely to be cost-effective.Neither treatment option was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY from a health care perspective.Screening programs for PTSD should be considered for wildfire evacuees, and individuals diagnosed with PTSD could be prescribed either TF-CBT or paroxetine depending on their preference and resources availability.
全球气候变化导致野火急剧增加。遭受野火的个人患有创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)的负担很重,而针对野火后PTSD的治疗方案的成本效益尚未得到研究。本研究的目的是进行成本效用分析,比较在加拿大成年野火撤离者中,先进行筛查然后用帕罗西汀或创伤聚焦认知行为疗法(TF-CBT)治疗与不进行筛查的情况。使用马尔可夫模型,从医疗保健和社会角度,在5年的时间范围内评估质量调整生命年(QALYs)和成本。模型中的所有成本和效用都按1.5%进行贴现。概率和确定性敏感性分析在支付意愿阈值为50,000美元的情况下,检验了增量净货币效益(INMB)的不确定性。从社会角度来看,不进行筛查(净货币效益=NMB=177,641美元)被先进行筛查然后用帕罗西汀治疗(NMB=180,733美元)和TF-CBT治疗(NMB=181,787美元)所主导,在每QALY支付意愿阈值为50,000美元时,TF-CBT具有最高的成本效益可能性(概率=0.649)。PTSD的初始患病率、接受治疗的概率和生产力成本对帕罗西汀或TF-CBT与不进行筛查相比的INMB影响最大。从医疗保健角度来看,在每QALY支付意愿阈值为50,000美元时,两种干预措施都不具有成本效益。与不进行筛查相比,先进行筛查然后用帕罗西汀或TF-CBT治疗被发现既能节省成本,又能为野火撤离者提供额外的QALYs。政府应考虑为野火撤离者资助PTSD筛查项目,然后用TF-CBT进行治疗。
两项先前的研究考察了在遭受其他灾害类型事件(即恐怖袭击和桑迪飓风)的个体中,先进行筛查然后治疗PTSD的成本效益,发现先进行筛查然后治疗(即认知行为疗法[CBT])具有很高的成本效益。在野火撤离者中,先进行筛查然后用帕罗西汀或创伤聚焦(TF)-CBT治疗可提供额外的质量调整生命年(QALYs),从社会角度来看是节省成本的。TF-CBT是最有可能具有成本效益的治疗选择。从医疗保健角度来看,在每QALY支付意愿阈值为50,000美元时,两种治疗选择都不具有成本效益。应考虑为野火撤离者开展PTSD筛查项目,对于被诊断为PTSD的个体,可根据其偏好和资源可用性开具TF-CBT或帕罗西汀的处方。