Brouwer Robin J, van Reijen Nick S, Dijkgraaf Marcel G, Hoencamp Rigo, Koelemay Mark Jw, van Hulst Robert A, Ubbink Dirk T
Department of Anaesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Surgery, Alrijne Hospital, Leiderdorp, The Netherlands.
Diving Hyperb Med. 2024 Dec 20;54(4):265-274. doi: 10.28920/dhm54.4.265-274.
The aim was to determine the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of additional hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) compared to standard care (SC) for ischaemic diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) regarding limb salvage and health status.
An economic analysis was conducted, comprising cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses, with a 12-month time horizon, using data from the DAMO₂CLES multicentre randomised clinical trial. Cost-effectiveness was defined as cost per limb saved and cost-utility as cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The difference in cost effectiveness between HBOT+SC and SC alone was determined via an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).
One-hundred and twenty patients were included, with 60 allocated to HBOT+SC and 60 to SC. No significant cost difference was found in the intention-to-treat analysis: €3,791 (bias corrected and accelerated [BCA] 95% CI, €3,556 - €-11,138). Cost per limb saved showed an ICER of €37,912 (BCA 95% CI €-112,188 - €1,063,561) for HBOT+SC vs. SC. There was no significant difference in mean QALYs: 0.54 for HBOT+SC vs. 0.56 for SC alone (-0.02; BCA 95% CI -0.11-0.08). This resulted in a cost-utility of minus €227,035 (BCA 95% CI €-361,569,550 - €-52,588) per QALY. Subgroup analysis for Wagner stages III/IV showed an ICER of €19,005 (BCA 95%CI, -€18,487 - €264,334) while HBOT did not show any benefit for Wagner stage II.
HBOT as an adjunct to SC showed no significant differences in costs and effectiveness for patients with DFUs regarding limb salvage and health status. However, for patients with Wagner stage III/IV ischaemic DFUs there was a trend towards better effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.
目的是确定与标准治疗(SC)相比,额外的高压氧治疗(HBOT)用于缺血性糖尿病足溃疡(DFU)保肢和健康状况方面的成本效益和成本效用。
进行了一项经济分析,包括成本效益分析和成本效用分析,时间跨度为12个月,使用了来自DAMO₂CLES多中心随机临床试验的数据。成本效益定义为每挽救一条肢体的成本,成本效用定义为每质量调整生命年(QALY)的成本。通过增量成本效益比(ICER)确定HBOT+SC与单独SC之间的成本效益差异。
纳入120名患者,60名分配至HBOT+SC组,60名分配至SC组。意向性分析未发现显著成本差异:3791欧元(偏差校正和加速[BCA]95%置信区间,3556欧元至-11138欧元)。HBOT+SC组与SC组相比,每挽救一条肢体的成本显示ICER为37912欧元(BCA 95%置信区间-112188欧元至1063561欧元)。平均QALY无显著差异:HBOT+SC组为0.54,单独SC组为0.56(-0.02;BCA 95%置信区间-0.11至0.08)。这导致每QALY的成本效用为-227035欧元(BCA 95%置信区间-361569550欧元至-52588欧元)。Wagner III/IV期亚组分析显示ICER为19005欧元(BCA 95%置信区间,-18487欧元至264334欧元),而HBOT对Wagner II期未显示任何益处。
对于DFU患者,HBOT作为SC的辅助治疗在保肢和健康状况方面的成本和有效性无显著差异。然而,对于Wagner III/IV期缺血性DFU患者,存在有效性和成本效益更佳的趋势。