Cost-Effectiveness of Midazolam Versus Haloperidol Versus Olanzapine for the Management of Acute Agitation in the Accident and Emergency Department

ObjectivesA multicenter randomized clinical trial in Hong Kong Accident and Emergency (A&E) departments concluded that intramuscular (IM) olanzapine is noninferior to haloperidol and midazolam, in terms of efficacy and safety, for the management of acutely agitated patients in A&E setting. Determining their comparative cost-effectiveness will further provide an economic perspective to inform the choice of sedative in this setting.MethodsThis analysis used data from a randomized clinical trial conducted in Hong Kong A&E departments between December 2014 and September 2019. A within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the 3 sedatives was conducted, from the A&E perspective and a within-trial time horizon, using a decision-analytic model. Sensitivity analyses were also undertaken.ResultsIn the base-case analysis, median total management costs associated with IM midazolam, haloperidol, and olanzapine were Hong Kong dollar (HKD) 1958.9 (US dollar [USD] 251.1), HKD 2504.5 (USD 321.1), and HKD 2467.6 (USD 316.4), respectively. Agitation management labor cost was the main cost driver, whereas drug costs contributed the least. Midazolam dominated over haloperidol and olanzapine. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses supported that midazolam remains dominant > 95% of the time and revealed no clear difference in the cost-effectiveness of IM olanzapine versus haloperidol (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio 667.16; 95% confidence interval ?770.89, 685.90).ConclusionsIM midazolam is the dominant cost-effective treatment for the management of acute agitation in the A&E setting. IM olanzapine could be considered as an alternative to IM haloperidol given that there is no clear difference in cost-effectiveness, and their adverse effect profile should be considered when choosing between them.     

丹参川芎嗪注射液对比丹参多酚酸盐注射液治疗冠心病心绞痛的药物经济学评价

目的 评价丹参川芎嗪注射液与丹参多酚酸盐注射液治疗冠心病心绞痛的临床疗效及经济性。方法 检索CBM、中国知网、维普、万方、Cochrane library、Pubmed、Embase等中英文数据库,查找丹参川芎嗪和丹参多酚酸盐治疗冠心病心绞痛的随机对照临床试验,按照纳入与排除标准筛选文献,提取资料,以间接荟萃（Meta）分析的方法系统评价两种药物治疗冠心病心绞痛的临床疗效;经济学评价采用成本效果法进行,其中成本指直接成本,包括常规治疗费、给药费、检查费以及住院费。结果 间接Meta分析结果显示,丹参川芎嗪与丹参多酚酸盐治疗冠心病心绞痛的有效率分别为89.51%和92.52%,心电图改善率分别为81.40%和84.05%。治疗心绞痛的疗程费用分别为4099.71元和5410.16元;丹参川芎嗪与丹参多酚酸盐的心绞痛改善成本效果比分别为45.80和58.48,心电图改善的成本效果比分别为50.36和64.37,敏感性分析结果稳定。结论 与丹参多酚酸盐注射液相比,在治疗冠心病心绞痛方面,丹参川芎嗪注射液可能更具经济学优势。     

PCI术后患者抗血小板治疗方案的药物经济学评价

目的 从医疗保险角度,对经皮冠脉支架置入（percutaneous coronary intervention,PCI）术后3种抗血小板药物治疗方案进行经济学评价。方法 3种治疗方案为在使用阿司匹林基础上,经验性给予国产氯吡格雷,或经验性给予替格瑞洛,或根据CYP2C19基因型指导选择国产氯吡格雷或替格瑞洛,由此建立决策树模型并进行成本效果分析,预测该3种方案避免主要心血管事件的发生率以及成本,研究时间为1年。结果 经验性给予国产氯吡格雷联合阿司匹林治疗方案为成本最低方案,但直接给予替格瑞洛联合阿司匹林治疗方案的经济性最好。结论 对于PCI术后的患者,最推荐直接采用替格瑞洛联合阿司匹林的治疗方案。     

Cost-effectiveness of dengue vaccination in ten endemic countries

Following publication of results from two phase-3 clinical trials in 10 countries or territories, endemic countries began licensing the first dengue vaccine in 2015. Using a published mathematical model, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of dengue vaccination in populations similar to those at the trial sites in those same Latin American and Asian countries. Our main scenarios (30-year horizon, 80% coverage) entailed 3-dose routine vaccinations costing US$20/dose beginning at age 9, potentially supplemented by catch-up programs of 4- or 8-year cohorts. We obtained illness costs per case, dengue mortality, vaccine wastage, and vaccine administration costs from the literature. We estimated that routine vaccination would reduce yearly direct and indirect illness cost per capita by 22% (from US$10.51 to US$8.17) in the Latin American countries and by 23% (from US$5.78 to US$4.44) in the Asian countries. Using a health system perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) averaged US$4,216/disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted in the five Latin American countries (range: US$666/DALY in Puerto Rico to US$5,865/DALY in Mexico). In the five Asian countries, the ICER averaged US$3,751/DALY (range: US$1,935/DALY in Malaysia to US$5,101/DALY in the Philippines). From a health system perspective, the vaccine proved to be highly cost effective (ICER under one times the per capita GDP) in seven countries and cost effective (ICER 1–3 times the per capita GDP) in the remaining three countries. From a societal perspective, routine vaccination proved cost-saving in three countries. Including catch-up campaigns gave similar ICERs. Thus, this vaccine could have a favorable economic value in sites similar to those in the trials.     

3种方案治疗儿童流感样症状的成本效果分析

目的:评价磷酸奥司他韦颗粒以及联合百蕊颗粒和三臣散治疗儿童流感样症状的经济性。方法:采用前瞻性实际临床试验法将2017年12月-2018年2月门急诊收治的流感样症状患儿270例随机分成奥司他韦颗粒(A组)、磷酸奥司他韦颗粒联合百蕊颗粒(B组)和磷酸奥司他韦颗粒联合三臣散(C组)3组,收集效果和成本数据。从患儿家长角度出发,采用成本-效果法进行分析。结果:实际纳入奥司他韦颗粒82例、磷酸奥司他韦颗粒联合百蕊颗粒82例和磷酸奥司他韦颗粒联合三臣散80例。3组的总有效率分别是80.49%,96.34%,88.75%。差异有显著性(P=0.005<0.05),不良反应发生率分别是6.1%,7.32%,7.5%,差异无显著性(P=0.93>0.05)。3组平均医疗总成本分别是547.63,604.40,590.82元,发热缓解时间分别是2.93,1.99,2.24d,总成本和发热缓解时间均有显著性(P=0.000<0.05)。以总有效率为效果指标,C/E分别是680.37,327.36,665.71,增量成本效果比(ICER)以成本最小的A组为对照,B组358.17,C组522.88。结论:以总有效率为效果指标,磷酸奥司他韦颗粒联合百蕊颗粒在3组中疗效较好,C/E值和并发症较低,是较经济的方案。     

Cost-Effectiveness of Antibiotic Prophylaxis Strategies for Transrectal Prostate Biopsy in an Era of Increasing Antimicrobial Resistance

Objectives

To determine the optimal antibiotic prophylaxis strategy for transrectal prostate biopsy (TRPB) as a function of the local antibiotic resistance profile.

Objectives,Budgets, Thresholds,and Opportunity Costs—A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [4]

The fourth section of our Special Task Force report focuses on a health plan or payer’s technology adoption or reimbursement decision, given the array of technologies, on the basis of their different values and costs. We discuss the role of budgets, thresholds, opportunity costs, and affordability in making decisions. First, we discuss the use of budgets and thresholds in private and public health plans, their interdependence, and connection to opportunity cost. Essentially, each payer should adopt a decision rule about what is good value for money given their budget; consistent use of a cost-per-quality-adjusted life-year threshold will ensure the maximum health gain for the budget. In the United States, different public and private insurance programs could use different thresholds, reflecting the differing generosity of their budgets and implying different levels of access to technologies. In addition, different insurance plans could consider different additional elements to the quality-adjusted life-year metric discussed elsewhere in our Special Task Force report. We then define affordability and discuss approaches to deal with it, including consideration of disinvestment and related adjustment costs, the impact of delaying new technologies, and comparative cost effectiveness of technologies. Over time, the availability of new technologies may increase the amount that populations want to spend on health care. We then discuss potential modifiers to thresholds, including uncertainty about the evidence used in the decision-making process. This article concludes by discussing the application of these concepts in the context of the pluralistic US health care system, as well as the “excess burden” of tax-financed public programs versus private programs.     

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Navigation Program for Colorectal Cancer Screening to Reduce Social Health Inequalities: A French Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Patient navigation programs to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening adherence have become widespread in recent years, especially among deprived populations.