Rajan Suja S, Yamal Jose-Miguel, Wang Mengxi, Saver Jeffrey L, Jacob Asha P, Gonzales Nicole R, Ifejika Nneka, Parker Stephanie A, Ganey Christopher, Gonzalez Michael O, Lairson David R, Bratina Patti L, Jones William J, Mackey Jason S, Lerario Mackenzie P, Navi Babak B, Alexandrov Ann W, Alexandrov Andrei, Nour May, Spokoyny Ilana, Bowry Ritvij, Czap Alexandra L, Grotta James C
Department of Management, Policy and Community Health, School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX.
Department of Biostatistics and Data Science, School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX.
Ann Neurol. 2025 Feb;97(2):209-221. doi: 10.1002/ana.27105. Epub 2024 Dec 3.
Given the high disease and cost burden of ischemic stroke, evaluating the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of new approaches to prevent and treat ischemic stroke is critical. Effective ischemic stroke management depends on timely administration of thrombolytics after stroke onset. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness associated with the use of mobile stroke units (MSUs) to expedite tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) administration, as compared with standard management through emergency medical services (EMS).
This study is a prospective, multicenter, alternating-week, cluster-controlled trial of MSU versus EMS. One-year and life-time cost-effectiveness analyses, using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) method, were performed from the perspective of CMS's Medicare. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) estimated using patient-reported EQ-5D-5L data were used as the effectiveness measure. Health care utilizations were converted to costs using average national Medicare reimbursements. ICERs excluding patients with pre-existing disability, and limited to stroke-related costs were also calculated.
The first-year ICER for all tPA-eligible patients using total cost differences between MSU and EMS groups was $238,873/QALY; for patients without pre-existing disability was $61,199/QALY. The lifetime ICERs for all tPA-eligible patients and for those without pre-existing disability were $94,710 and $31,259/QALY, respectively. All ICERs were lower when restricted to stroke-related costs and were highly dependent on the number of patients treated per year in an MSU.
MSUs' cost-effectiveness is borderline if we consider total first-year costs and outcomes in all tPA-eligible patients. MSUs are cost-effective to highly cost-effective when calculations are based on patients without pre-existing disability, patients' lifetime horizon, stroke-related costs, and more patients treated per year in an MSU. ANN NEUROL 2025;97:209-221.
鉴于缺血性中风的高疾病负担和成本负担,评估预防和治疗缺血性中风新方法的临床疗效和成本效益至关重要。有效的缺血性中风管理取决于中风发作后及时给予溶栓药物。本研究评估了与使用移动中风单元(MSU)加速组织纤溶酶原激活剂(tPA)给药相关的成本效益,并与通过紧急医疗服务(EMS)的标准管理进行比较。
本研究是一项MSU与EMS的前瞻性、多中心、隔周、整群对照试验。从医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)的医疗保险角度,使用增量成本效益比(ICER)方法进行了一年期和终身成本效益分析。使用患者报告的EQ-5D-5L数据估计的质量调整生命年(QALY)用作有效性指标。医疗保健利用率使用全国医疗保险平均报销费用转换为成本。还计算了排除已有残疾患者且仅限于中风相关成本的ICER。
使用MSU组和EMS组之间的总成本差异,所有符合tPA治疗条件患者的第一年ICER为238,873美元/QALY;对于无已有残疾的患者为61,199美元/QALY。所有符合tPA治疗条件患者和无已有残疾患者的终身ICER分别为94,710美元和31,259美元/QALY。当仅限于中风相关成本时,所有ICER均较低,并且高度依赖于MSU每年治疗的患者数量。
如果我们考虑所有符合tPA治疗条件患者的第一年总成本和结果,MSU的成本效益处于临界状态。当基于无已有残疾的患者、患者的终身范围、中风相关成本以及MSU每年治疗更多患者进行计算时,MSU具有成本效益至高成本效益。《神经病学纪事》2025年;97:209 - 221。