Das A
Division of Gastroenterology, University Hospitals of Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Am J Gastroenterol. 1998 Oct;93(10):1895-900. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.1998.00545.x.
The aim of this study was to perform a cost analysis of different strategies of long term antibiotic prophylaxis for spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) in patients with cirrhosis and ascites. The study involved a cost analysis using a decision analysis model and patients with cirrhosis and ascites who are at risk for developing SBP.
Two different strategies of antibiotic prophylaxis were compared with a "no prophylaxis" strategy in patients with cirrhosis and ascites using a decision analysis model. In strategy I, antibiotic prophylaxis was administered in all patients with cirrhosis and ascites and in strategy II, patients were stratified into a low risk and a high risk group on the basis of serum bilirubin and ascitic fluid protein levels; only patients in the high risk group received antibiotic prophylaxis. The cost per patient treated for 1 yr was the outcome measure compared in the different strategies. Clinical input probabilities and ranges used were obtained by searching the MEDLINE database for English language articles. Cost estimates were obtained from a university hospital setting. Cost analysis was done with a societal perspective, and only direct costs were taken into account. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the effect of variations in the key clinical probabilities and cost estimates ranging from a best case to a worst case scenario on the outcome measure.
The estimated cost per patient treated in strategy I, strategy II, and strategy III (the strategy of "no prophylaxis") were $1311, $1123, and $3509, respectively. Over a broad range of clinical and cost variables, the strategy of risk stratification and restriction of antibiotic prophylaxis to the subgroup of patients with cirrhosis and ascites who were at high risk for SBP (as identified by serum bilirubin >2.5 mg/dl and ascitic fluid protein <1 g/dl) was the most favored strategy. However, when the cost of prophylaxis was low or the probability of a primary episode of SBP was at the lower end of the range reported in the literature, administering antibiotic prophylaxis to all patients with cirrhosis and ascites was the least costly strategy.
This cost analysis indicates that antibiotic prophylaxis particularly when restricted to a subgroup of patients who, by simple laboratory parameters, are identified to be at high risk for SBP, is very cost-effective in the prevention of SBP in patients with cirrhosis and ascites.
本研究旨在对肝硬化腹水患者自发性细菌性腹膜炎(SBP)的不同长期抗生素预防策略进行成本分析。该研究采用决策分析模型,对有发生SBP风险的肝硬化腹水患者进行成本分析。
使用决策分析模型,将两种不同的抗生素预防策略与肝硬化腹水患者的“不预防”策略进行比较。在策略I中,对所有肝硬化腹水患者进行抗生素预防;在策略II中,根据血清胆红素和腹水蛋白水平将患者分为低风险组和高风险组;仅对高风险组患者进行抗生素预防。不同策略比较的结果指标是每位患者1年的治疗成本。通过检索MEDLINE数据库中的英文文章获得临床输入概率和范围。成本估计来自一家大学医院。从社会角度进行成本分析,仅考虑直接成本。进行敏感性分析,以评估关键临床概率和成本估计从最佳情况到最坏情况的变化对结果指标的影响。
策略I、策略II和策略III(“不预防”策略)中每位患者的估计治疗成本分别为1311美元、1123美元和3509美元。在广泛的临床和成本变量范围内,风险分层并将抗生素预防限制在肝硬化腹水且SBP高风险亚组患者(根据血清胆红素>2.5mg/dl和腹水蛋白<1g/dl确定)的策略是最受青睐的策略。然而,当预防成本较低或SBP首发事件的概率处于文献报道范围的下限,对所有肝硬化腹水患者进行抗生素预防是成本最低的策略。
该成本分析表明,抗生素预防,特别是当仅限于通过简单实验室参数确定为SBP高风险的亚组患者时,在预防肝硬化腹水患者的SBP方面具有很高的成本效益。