Cost-effectiveness of out-of-hospital continuous positive airway pressure for acute respiratory failure: decision analytic modelling using data from a feasibility trial.
Acute respiratory failure
Continuous positive airway pressure
Cost-effectiveness
Journal
BMC emergency medicine
ISSN: 1471-227X
Titre abrégé: BMC Emerg Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968543
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 01 2021
25 01 2021
Historique:
received:
10
08
2020
accepted:
08
01
2021
entrez:
26
1
2021
pubmed:
27
1
2021
medline:
17
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Standard prehospital management for Acute respiratory failure (ARF) involves controlled oxygen therapy. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is a potentially beneficial alternative treatment, however, it is uncertain whether this could improve outcomes and provide value for money. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of prehospital CPAP in ARF. A cost-utility economic evaluation was performed using a probabilistic decision tree model synthesising available evidence. The model consisted of a hypothetical cohort of patients in a representative ambulance service with undifferentiated ARF, receiving standard oxygen therapy or prehospital CPAP. Costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated using methods recommended by NICE. In the base case analysis, using CPAP effectiveness estimates form the ACUTE trial, the mean expected costs of standard care and prehospital CPAP were £15,201 and £14,850 respectively and the corresponding mean expected QALYs were 1.190 and 1.128, respectively. The mean ICER estimated as standard oxygen therapy compared to prehospital CPAP was £5685 per QALY which indicated that standard oxygen therapy strategy was likely to be cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY (67% probability). The scenario analysis, using effectiveness estimates from an updated meta-analysis, suggested that prehospital CPAP was more effective (mean incremental QALYs of 0.157), but also more expensive (mean incremental costs of £1522), than standard care. The mean ICER, estimated as prehospital CPAP compared to standard care, was £9712 per QALY. At the £20,000 per QALY prehospital CPAP was highly likely to be the most cost-effective strategy (94%). Cost-effectiveness of prehospital CPAP depends upon the estimate of effectiveness. When based on a small pragmatic feasibility trial, standard oxygen therapy is cost-effective. When based on meta-analysis of heterogeneous trials, CPAP is cost-effective. Value of information analyses support commissioning of a large pragmatic effectiveness trial, providing feasibility and plausibility conditions are met.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Standard prehospital management for Acute respiratory failure (ARF) involves controlled oxygen therapy. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is a potentially beneficial alternative treatment, however, it is uncertain whether this could improve outcomes and provide value for money. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of prehospital CPAP in ARF.
METHODS
A cost-utility economic evaluation was performed using a probabilistic decision tree model synthesising available evidence. The model consisted of a hypothetical cohort of patients in a representative ambulance service with undifferentiated ARF, receiving standard oxygen therapy or prehospital CPAP. Costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated using methods recommended by NICE.
RESULTS
In the base case analysis, using CPAP effectiveness estimates form the ACUTE trial, the mean expected costs of standard care and prehospital CPAP were £15,201 and £14,850 respectively and the corresponding mean expected QALYs were 1.190 and 1.128, respectively. The mean ICER estimated as standard oxygen therapy compared to prehospital CPAP was £5685 per QALY which indicated that standard oxygen therapy strategy was likely to be cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY (67% probability). The scenario analysis, using effectiveness estimates from an updated meta-analysis, suggested that prehospital CPAP was more effective (mean incremental QALYs of 0.157), but also more expensive (mean incremental costs of £1522), than standard care. The mean ICER, estimated as prehospital CPAP compared to standard care, was £9712 per QALY. At the £20,000 per QALY prehospital CPAP was highly likely to be the most cost-effective strategy (94%).
CONCLUSIONS
Cost-effectiveness of prehospital CPAP depends upon the estimate of effectiveness. When based on a small pragmatic feasibility trial, standard oxygen therapy is cost-effective. When based on meta-analysis of heterogeneous trials, CPAP is cost-effective. Value of information analyses support commissioning of a large pragmatic effectiveness trial, providing feasibility and plausibility conditions are met.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33494699
doi: 10.1186/s12873-021-00404-8
pii: 10.1186/s12873-021-00404-8
pmc: PMC7836588
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
13Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : 15/08/40
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : National Institute for Health Research
ID : 15/08/40
Références
Crit Care. 2006;10(3):R82
pubmed: 16723034
Value Health. 2009 Mar;12 Suppl 1:S5-9
pubmed: 19250132
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2008 Jul-Sep;12(3):277-85
pubmed: 18584492
Health Technol Assess. 2015 Jun;19(42):v-vi, 1-102
pubmed: 26102313
Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(9):733-44
pubmed: 18767894
Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2018 Jun 18;4:86
pubmed: 29946477
Health Econ. 2005 Apr;14(4):339-47
pubmed: 15736142
BMJ Open. 2020 Jul 23;10(7):e035915
pubmed: 32709643
Health Econ. 2004 May;13(5):405-15
pubmed: 15127421
Med Decis Making. 2007 Jul-Aug;27(4):448-70
pubmed: 17761960
Health Technol Assess. 2009 Jul;13(33):1-106
pubmed: 19615296
Age Ageing. 2008 May;37(3):251-7
pubmed: 18388161
Ann Emerg Med. 2015 May;65(5):556-563.e6
pubmed: 25737210