Cost-Effectiveness of Stock Epinephrine Autoinjectors on Commercial Aircraft.

Allergic reaction Anaphylaxis Autoinjector Cost-effectiveness Food allergy fatality Health state utility In-flight medical emergency Quality of life Simulation Value-based price

Journal

The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice
ISSN: 2213-2201
Titre abrégé: J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101597220

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Historique:
received: 06 02 2019
revised: 02 04 2019
accepted: 22 04 2019
pubmed: 16 6 2019
medline: 6 10 2020
entrez: 16 6 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

In-flight food-allergic reactions are rare events, but given increasing reports, grass-root advocates have lobbied to replace aircraft emergency kit epinephrine ampules with autoinjectors. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of stock epinephrine on commercial aircraft. We conducted a Markov model with microsimulation of food-allergic individuals over an 80-year time horizon to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of supplementing airline medical kits with epinephrine autoinjectors (eg, providing autoinjector twin-packs in addition to the epinephrine ampule in the medical kit), versus not doing so, using a per-plane annual value-based cost ceiling of $338 (the value-based ceiling for school stock epinephrine). We assumed that autoinjector availability reduced fatality risk by 10%. Equipping all commercial aircraft with autoinjectors cost $2,470,422/year ($0.08/passenger-at-risk), from a societal perspective and when distributed over all at-risk travelers. Over the model horizon, the supplemental autoinjector strategy cost $32,329.29 (standard deviation [SD], $4024.32) versus $32,326.70 (SD $4024.29), produced 26.8917 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (SD, 2.9720) versus 26.8915 (SD, 2.9725), with a lower fatality rate (0.00012; SD, 0.01095 vs 0.00015; SD, 0.1225) versus the ampule-only strategy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of supplemental airline epinephrine autoinjectors was $10,766/QALY in the base-case analysis. The supplemental model remained cost-effective at a willingness to pay threshold of $100,000/QALY if it produced a minimum 1.4% annual food allergy fatality risk reduction, and dominated if it lowered diversion risk or event-related medical care costs-per-event by 10%, respectively. Under base-case scenarios, an airline supplemental stock epinephrine model is cost-effective, with a high value-based cost-ceiling and low annual cost per passenger-at-risk of $0.08.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
In-flight food-allergic reactions are rare events, but given increasing reports, grass-root advocates have lobbied to replace aircraft emergency kit epinephrine ampules with autoinjectors.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of stock epinephrine on commercial aircraft.
METHODS
We conducted a Markov model with microsimulation of food-allergic individuals over an 80-year time horizon to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of supplementing airline medical kits with epinephrine autoinjectors (eg, providing autoinjector twin-packs in addition to the epinephrine ampule in the medical kit), versus not doing so, using a per-plane annual value-based cost ceiling of $338 (the value-based ceiling for school stock epinephrine). We assumed that autoinjector availability reduced fatality risk by 10%.
RESULTS
Equipping all commercial aircraft with autoinjectors cost $2,470,422/year ($0.08/passenger-at-risk), from a societal perspective and when distributed over all at-risk travelers. Over the model horizon, the supplemental autoinjector strategy cost $32,329.29 (standard deviation [SD], $4024.32) versus $32,326.70 (SD $4024.29), produced 26.8917 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (SD, 2.9720) versus 26.8915 (SD, 2.9725), with a lower fatality rate (0.00012; SD, 0.01095 vs 0.00015; SD, 0.1225) versus the ampule-only strategy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of supplemental airline epinephrine autoinjectors was $10,766/QALY in the base-case analysis. The supplemental model remained cost-effective at a willingness to pay threshold of $100,000/QALY if it produced a minimum 1.4% annual food allergy fatality risk reduction, and dominated if it lowered diversion risk or event-related medical care costs-per-event by 10%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Under base-case scenarios, an airline supplemental stock epinephrine model is cost-effective, with a high value-based cost-ceiling and low annual cost per passenger-at-risk of $0.08.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31201119
pii: S2213-2198(19)30433-7
doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2019.04.029
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Bronchodilator Agents 0
Epinephrine YKH834O4BH

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

2270-2276

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Marcus Shaker (M)

Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Section of Allergy and Immunology, Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine, Lebanon, NH. Electronic address: Marcus.S.Shaker@hitchcock.org.

Matthew Greenhawt (M)

Section of Allergy and Immunology, Food Challenge and Research Unit, Children's Hospital Colorado, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colo.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH