Study objective We determine the minimum mortality reduction that helicopter emergency medical services (EMS) should provide relative to ground EMS for the scene transport of trauma victims to offset ...higher costs, inherent transport risks, and inevitable overtriage of patients with minor injury. Methods We developed a decision-analytic model to compare the costs and outcomes of helicopter versus ground EMS transport to a trauma center from a societal perspective during a patient's lifetime. We determined the mortality reduction needed to make helicopter transport cost less than $100,000 and $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained compared with ground EMS. Model inputs were derived from the National Study on the Costs and Outcomes of Trauma, National Trauma Data Bank, Medicare reimbursements, and literature. We assessed robustness with probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results Helicopter EMS must provide a minimum of a 15% relative risk reduction in mortality (1.3 lives saved/100 patients with the mean characteristics of the National Study on the Costs and Outcomes of Trauma cohort) to cost less than $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained and a reduction of at least 30% (3.3 lives saved/100 patients) to cost less than $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Helicopter EMS becomes more cost-effective with significant reductions in patients with minor injury who are triaged to air transport or if long-term disability outcomes are improved. Conclusion Helicopter EMS needs to provide at least a 15% mortality reduction or a measurable improvement in long-term disability to compare favorably with other interventions considered cost-effective. Given current evidence, it is not clear that helicopter EMS achieves this mortality or disability reduction. Reducing overtriage of patients with minor injury to helicopter EMS would improve its cost-effectiveness.
Objectives The authors sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of statins for primary prevention of myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Background ...Patients with CKD have an elevated risk of MI and stroke. Although HMG Co-A reductase inhibitors (“statins”) may prevent cardiovascular events in patients with non–dialysis-requiring CKD, adverse drug effects and competing risks could materially influence net effects and clinical decision-making. Methods We developed a decision-analytic model of CKD and cardiovascular disease (CVD) to determine the cost-effectiveness of low-cost generic statins for primary CVD prevention in men and women with hypertension and mild-to-moderate CKD. Outcomes included MI and stroke rates, discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and lifetime costs (2010 USD), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Results For 65-year-old men with moderate hypertension and mild-to-moderate CKD, statins reduced the combined rate of MI and stroke, yielded 0.10 QALYs, and increased costs by $1,800 ($18,000 per QALY gained). For patients with lower baseline cardiovascular risks, health and economic benefits were smaller; for 65-year-old women, statins yielded 0.06 QALYs and increased costs by $1,900 ($33,400 per QALY gained). Results were sensitive to rates of rhabdomyolysis and drug costs. Statins are less cost-effective when obtained at average retail prices, particularly in patients at lower CVD risk. Conclusions Although statins reduce absolute CVD risk in patients with CKD, the increased risk of rhabdomyolysis, and competing risks associated with progressive CKD, partly offset these gains. Low-cost generic statins appear cost-effective for primary prevention of CVD in patients with mild-to-moderate CKD and hypertension.
Abstract Objectives This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as destination therapy in ambulatory patients with advanced heart failure. Background LVADs ...improve survival and quality of life in inotrope-dependent heart failure, but data are limited as to their value in less severely ill patients. Methods We determined costs of care among Medicare beneficiaries before and after LVAD implantation from 2009 to 2010. We used these costs and efficacy data from published studies in a Markov model to project the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of destination LVAD therapy compared with that of medical management. We discounted costs and benefits at 3% annually and report costs as 2016 U.S. dollars. Results The mean cost of LVAD implantation was $175,420. The mean cost of readmission was lower before LVAD than after ($12,377 vs. $19,465, respectively; p < 0.001), while monthly outpatient costs were similar ($3,364 vs. $2,974, respectively; p = 0.54). In the lifetime simulation model, LVAD increased quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (4.41 vs. 2.67, respectively), readmissions (13.03 vs. 6.35, respectively), and costs ($726,200 vs. $361,800, respectively) compared with medical management, yielding an ICER of $209,400 per QALY gained and $597,400 per life-year gained. These results were sensitive to LVAD readmission rates and outpatient care costs; the ICER would be $86,900 if these parameters were 50% lower. Conclusions LVADs in non–inotrope-dependent heart failure patients improved quality of life but substantially increased lifetime costs because of frequent readmissions and costly follow-up care. LVADs may provide good value if outpatient costs and adverse events can be reduced.
Abstract Objectives This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the CardioMEMS (CardioMEMS Heart Failure System, St Jude Medical Inc, Atlanta, Georgia) device in patients with chronic ...heart failure. Background The CardioMEMS device, an implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitor, was shown to reduce hospitalizations for heart failure and improve quality of life in the CHAMPION (CardioMEMS Heart Sensor Allows Monitoring of Pressure to Improve Outcomes in NYHA Class III Heart Failure Patients) trial. Methods We developed a Markov model to determine the hospitalization, survival, quality of life, cost, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CardioMEMS implantation compared with usual care among a CHAMPION trial cohort of patients with heart failure. We obtained event rates and utilities from published trial data; we used costs from literature estimates and Medicare reimbursement data. We performed subgroup analyses of preserved and reduced ejection fraction and an exploratory analysis in a lower-risk cohort on the basis of the CHARM (Candesartan in Heart failure: Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity) trials. Results CardioMEMS reduced lifetime hospitalizations (2.18 vs. 3.12), increased quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (2.74 vs. 2.46), and increased costs ($176,648 vs. $156,569), thus yielding a cost of $71,462 per QALY gained and $48,054 per life-year gained. The cost per QALY gained was $82,301 in patients with reduced ejection fraction and $47,768 in those with preserved ejection fraction. In the lower-risk CHARM cohort, the device would need to reduce hospitalizations for heart failure by 41% to cost less than $100,000 per QALY gained. The cost-effectiveness was most sensitive to the device’s durability. Conclusions In populations similar to that of the CHAMPION trial, the CardioMEMS device is cost-effective if the trial effectiveness is sustained over long periods. Post-marketing surveillance data on durability will further clarify its value.
Residents of prisons have experienced disproportionate COVID-19-related health harms. To control outbreaks, many prisons in the USA restricted in-person activities, which are now resuming even as ...viral variants proliferate. This study aims to use mathematical modelling to assess the risks and harms of COVID-19 outbreaks in prisons under a range of policies, including resumption of activities.
We obtained daily resident-level data for all California state prisons from Jan 1, 2020, to May 15, 2021, describing prison layouts, housing status, sociodemographic and health characteristics, participation in activities, and COVID-19 testing, infection, and vaccination status. We developed a transmission-dynamic stochastic microsimulation parameterised by the California data and published literature. After an initial infection is introduced to a prison, the model evaluates the effect of various policy scenarios on infections and hospitalisations over 200 days. Scenarios vary by vaccine coverage, baseline immunity (0%, 25%, or 50%), resumption of activities, and use of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) that reduce transmission by 75%. We simulated five prison types that differ by residential layout and demographics, and estimated outcomes with and without repeated infection introductions over the 200 days.
If a viral variant is introduced into a prison that has resumed pre-2020 contact levels, has moderate vaccine coverage (ranging from 36% to 76% among residents, dependent on age, with 40% coverage for staff), and has no baseline immunity, 23–74% of residents are expected to be infected over 200 days. High vaccination coverage (90%) coupled with NPIs reduces cumulative infections to 2–54%. Even in prisons with low room occupancies (ie, no more than two occupants) and low levels of cumulative infections (ie, <10%), hospitalisation risks are substantial when these prisons house medically vulnerable populations. Risks of large outbreaks (>20% of residents infected) are substantially higher if infections are repeatedly introduced.
Balancing benefits of resuming activities against risks of outbreaks presents challenging trade-offs. After achieving high vaccine coverage, prisons with mostly one-to-two-person cells that have higher baseline immunity from previous outbreaks can resume in-person activities with low risk of a widespread new outbreak, provided they maintain widespread NPIs, continue testing, and take measures to protect the medically vulnerable.
Horowitz Family Foundation, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Science Foundation, Open Society Foundation, Advanced Micro Devices.
Empirically Evaluating Decision-Analytic Models Goldhaber-Fiebert, Jeremy D., PhD; Stout, Natasha K., PhD; Goldie, Sue J., MD, MPH
Value in health,
August 2010, Letnik:
13, Številka:
5
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Abstract Objectives Model-based cost-effectiveness analyses support decision-making. To augment model credibility, evaluation via comparison to independent, empirical studies is recommended. Methods ...We developed a structured reporting format for model evaluation and conducted a structured literature review to characterize current model evaluation recommendations and practices. As an illustration, we applied the reporting format to evaluate a microsimulation of human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. The model's outputs and uncertainty ranges were compared with multiple outcomes from a study of long-term progression from high-grade precancer (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia CIN) to cancer. Outcomes included 5 to 30-year cumulative cancer risk among women with and without appropriate CIN treatment. Consistency was measured by model ranges overlapping study confidence intervals. Results The structured reporting format included: matching baseline characteristics and follow-up, reporting model and study uncertainty, and stating metrics of consistency for model and study results. Structured searches yielded 2963 articles with 67 meeting inclusion criteria and found variation in how current model evaluations are reported. Evaluation of the cervical cancer microsimulation, reported using the proposed format, showed a modeled cumulative risk of invasive cancer for inadequately treated women of 39.6% (30.9–49.7) at 30 years, compared with the study: 37.5% (28.4–48.3). For appropriately treated women, modeled risks were 1.0% (0.7–1.3) at 30 years, study: 1.5% (0.4–3.3). Conclusions To support external and projective validity, cost-effectiveness models should be iteratively evaluated as new studies become available, with reporting standardized to facilitate assessment. Such evaluations are particularly relevant for models used to conduct comparative effectiveness analyses.
Summary Background The post-2015 End TB Strategy proposes targets of 50% reduction in tuberculosis incidence and 75% reduction in mortality from tuberculosis by 2025. We aimed to assess whether these ...targets are feasible in three high-burden countries with contrasting epidemiology and previous programmatic achievements. Methods 11 independently developed mathematical models of tuberculosis transmission projected the epidemiological impact of currently available tuberculosis interventions for prevention, diagnosis, and treatment in China, India, and South Africa. Models were calibrated with data on tuberculosis incidence and mortality in 2012. Representatives from national tuberculosis programmes and the advocacy community provided distinct country-specific intervention scenarios, which included screening for symptoms, active case finding, and preventive therapy. Findings Aggressive scale-up of any single intervention scenario could not achieve the post-2015 End TB Strategy targets in any country. However, the models projected that, in the South Africa national tuberculosis programme scenario, a combination of continuous isoniazid preventive therapy for individuals on antiretroviral therapy, expanded facility-based screening for symptoms of tuberculosis at health centres, and improved tuberculosis care could achieve a 55% reduction in incidence (range 31–62%) and a 72% reduction in mortality (range 64–82%) compared with 2015 levels. For India, and particularly for China, full scale-up of all interventions in tuberculosis-programme performance fell short of the 2025 targets, despite preventing a cumulative 3·4 million cases. The advocacy scenarios illustrated the high impact of detecting and treating latent tuberculosis. Interpretation Major reductions in tuberculosis burden seem possible with current interventions. However, additional interventions, adapted to country-specific tuberculosis epidemiology and health systems, are needed to reach the post-2015 End TB Strategy targets at country level. Funding Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Summary Background The post-2015 End TB Strategy sets global targets of reducing tuberculosis incidence by 50% and mortality by 75% by 2025. We aimed to assess resource requirements and ...cost-effectiveness of strategies to achieve these targets in China, India, and South Africa. Methods We examined intervention scenarios developed in consultation with country stakeholders, which scaled up existing interventions to high but feasible coverage by 2025. Nine independent modelling groups collaborated to estimate policy outcomes, and we estimated the cost of each scenario by synthesising service use estimates, empirical cost data, and expert opinion on implementation strategies. We estimated health effects (ie, disability-adjusted life-years averted) and resource implications for 2016–35, including patient-incurred costs. To assess resource requirements and cost-effectiveness, we compared scenarios with a base case representing continued current practice. Findings Incremental tuberculosis service costs differed by scenario and country, and in some cases they more than doubled existing funding needs. In general, expansion of tuberculosis services substantially reduced patient-incurred costs and, in India and China, produced net cost savings for most interventions under a societal perspective. In all three countries, expansion of access to care produced substantial health gains. Compared with current practice and conventional cost-effectiveness thresholds, most intervention approaches seemed highly cost-effective. Interpretation Expansion of tuberculosis services seems cost-effective for high-burden countries and could generate substantial health and economic benefits for patients, although substantial new funding would be required. Further work to determine the optimal intervention mix for each country is necessary. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
Background: Chronic hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection affects millions of Americans. Health care systems face complex choices between highly efficacious, costly treatments. This study assessed the ...cost-effectiveness of treatments for chronic, genotype 1 HCV monoinfected, treatment-naïve individuals in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and general US health care systems. Methods: The study used a decision-analytic Markov model, employing appropriate payer perspectives and time horizons, and discounting benefits and costs at 3% annually. Interventions included the following: sofosbuvir/ledipasvir (SOF-LDV); ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir/dasabuvir (3D); sofosbuvir/simeprevir (SOF-SMV); sofosbuvir/pegylated interferon/ribavirin (SOF-RBV-PEG); boceprevir/pegylated interferon/ribavirin (BOC-RBV-PEG); and pegylated interferon/ribavirin (PEG-RBV). Outcomes were sustained virologic response (SVR), advanced liver disease, costs, quality adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness. Results: SOF-LDV and 3D achieve high SVR rates, reducing advanced liver disease (>20% relative to no treatment), and increasing QALYs by >2 years per person. For the non-VA population, at current prices ($5040 per week for SOF-LDV; $4796 per week for 3D), SOF-LDV’s lifetime cost ($293,370) is $18,000 lower than 3D’s because of its shorter duration in subgroups. SOF-LDV costs $17,100 per QALY gained relative to no treatment. 3D costs $208,000 per QALY gained relative to SOF-LDV. Both dominate other treatments and are even more cost-effective for the VA, though VA aggregate treatment costs still exceed $4 billion at SOF-LDV prices of $3308 per week. Drug prices strongly determine relative cost-effectiveness for SOF-LDV and 3D; with price reductions of 20% to 30% depending on health system, 3D could be cost-effective relative to SOF-LDV. We currently lack head-to-head regimen effectiveness trials. Conclusions: New HCV treatments are cost-effective in multiple health care systems if trial-estimated efficacy is achieved in practice, though, at current prices, total expenditures could present substantial challenges.
PDF
