Hull R, Hirsh J, Sackett D L, Stoddart G
N Engl J Med. 1981 Jun 25;304(26):1561-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198106253042602.
Until the past decade, physicians were content to base therapeutic decisions on the clinical diagnosis of deep-vein thrombosis. Subsequently, numerous studies demonstrated that clinical diagnosis of this condition is nonspecific. Although many now use objective methods to diagnose venous thrombosis, their relative cost and effectiveness have not been adequately studied. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of 516 patients with clinically suspected venous thrombosis who were evaluated by clinical diagnosis, venography, and the less invasive combination of impedance plethysmography and leg scanning. We used this analysis to rank these alternative approaches in terms of both cost and effectiveness. The results indicate that clinical diagnosis is cost ineffective. Venography is cost effective--more so when applied as an outpatient investigation. Impedance plethysmography plus leg scanning is a practical, less invasive alternative to outpatient venography. The cost of inpatient diagnosis is likely to remain the major cost; thus, emphasis should be placed on outpatient diagnostic procedures.
直到过去十年,医生们一直满足于基于深静脉血栓形成的临床诊断来做出治疗决策。随后,大量研究表明,这种疾病的临床诊断缺乏特异性。尽管现在许多人使用客观方法来诊断静脉血栓形成,但其相对成本和有效性尚未得到充分研究。我们对516例临床怀疑静脉血栓形成的患者进行了成本效益分析,这些患者接受了临床诊断、静脉造影以及侵入性较小的阻抗体积描记法和腿部扫描相结合的检查。我们利用该分析从成本和有效性两方面对这些替代方法进行了排序。结果表明,临床诊断成本效益不佳。静脉造影具有成本效益——作为门诊检查应用时更是如此。阻抗体积描记法加腿部扫描是门诊静脉造影的一种实用、侵入性较小的替代方法。住院诊断的成本可能仍然是主要成本;因此,应重点关注门诊诊断程序。