目的通过成本-效用分析,评价孕早期行胎儿结构畸形超声筛查相比于孕中期行胎儿结构畸形超声筛查的经济性,为临床路径优化提供循证依据。方法从全社会角度出发,构建决策树模型,模拟孕妇于孕早期行胎儿结构畸形超声筛查(干预组)与于孕中...目的通过成本-效用分析,评价孕早期行胎儿结构畸形超声筛查相比于孕中期行胎儿结构畸形超声筛查的经济性,为临床路径优化提供循证依据。方法从全社会角度出发,构建决策树模型,模拟孕妇于孕早期行胎儿结构畸形超声筛查(干预组)与于孕中期行胎儿结构畸形超声筛查(对照组)2种不同产前筛查方案的临床选择及转归路径,评估2组不同路径下的成本-效用情况。模型模拟时长为18周,临床转移概率和成本参数来源于深圳市南山区妇幼保健院数据,效用数据来源于已公开发表的文献。结果指标包括成本、质量调整生命年(qualityadjusted life years,QALYs)和增量成本-效果比(incremental cost-effectiveness ratio,ICER)。通过敏感性分析评估模型结果的稳健性。结果相比对照组,干预组可减少不必要的妊娠发生,以更少的总成本投入获得更多的QALYs,ICER为−161732.68元/QALY,具有绝对成本效果优势。概率敏感性分析表明基础分析结果具有稳健性,干预组具有成本效果的概率为94.60%。结论在全社会角度下,于孕早期进行胎儿结构畸形筛查相比于孕中期具有绝对的经济学优势。展开更多
OBJECTIVE: To calculate and compare the cost of Port and PICC's application in long-term intravenous administration, and to support the decision making of hospital manager. METHODS: Literature review and patient s...OBJECTIVE: To calculate and compare the cost of Port and PICC's application in long-term intravenous administration, and to support the decision making of hospital manager. METHODS: Literature review and patient survey in 2 oncology centers in China were carried out to investigate the cost and impact of Port and PICC for patients. The cost at different time of intravenous administration was calculated and compared. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed and tornado graph was drawn. RESULTS: Direct cost of Port at 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 years were7442, 8005, 8553, and 9131 CNY, and 4700, 9399, 14032, 18799 CNY for PICC respectively. Direct & indirect cost at 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 years were 9291, 11704, 14101, 16529 CNY for Port and 9697, 19393, 29023, 38787 CNY for PICC. Sensitivity analysis showed that productivity loss and device maintenance cost were the most in?uential factors to the result. CONCLUSION: Port had higher cost in short term and less in long term compared with PICC. Patients expected to get intravenous administration more than 0.5 year should use Port if both direct and indirect costs were included.展开更多
文摘目的通过成本-效用分析,评价孕早期行胎儿结构畸形超声筛查相比于孕中期行胎儿结构畸形超声筛查的经济性,为临床路径优化提供循证依据。方法从全社会角度出发,构建决策树模型,模拟孕妇于孕早期行胎儿结构畸形超声筛查(干预组)与于孕中期行胎儿结构畸形超声筛查(对照组)2种不同产前筛查方案的临床选择及转归路径,评估2组不同路径下的成本-效用情况。模型模拟时长为18周,临床转移概率和成本参数来源于深圳市南山区妇幼保健院数据,效用数据来源于已公开发表的文献。结果指标包括成本、质量调整生命年(qualityadjusted life years,QALYs)和增量成本-效果比(incremental cost-effectiveness ratio,ICER)。通过敏感性分析评估模型结果的稳健性。结果相比对照组,干预组可减少不必要的妊娠发生,以更少的总成本投入获得更多的QALYs,ICER为−161732.68元/QALY,具有绝对成本效果优势。概率敏感性分析表明基础分析结果具有稳健性,干预组具有成本效果的概率为94.60%。结论在全社会角度下,于孕早期进行胎儿结构畸形筛查相比于孕中期具有绝对的经济学优势。
文摘OBJECTIVE: To calculate and compare the cost of Port and PICC's application in long-term intravenous administration, and to support the decision making of hospital manager. METHODS: Literature review and patient survey in 2 oncology centers in China were carried out to investigate the cost and impact of Port and PICC for patients. The cost at different time of intravenous administration was calculated and compared. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed and tornado graph was drawn. RESULTS: Direct cost of Port at 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 years were7442, 8005, 8553, and 9131 CNY, and 4700, 9399, 14032, 18799 CNY for PICC respectively. Direct & indirect cost at 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 years were 9291, 11704, 14101, 16529 CNY for Port and 9697, 19393, 29023, 38787 CNY for PICC. Sensitivity analysis showed that productivity loss and device maintenance cost were the most in?uential factors to the result. CONCLUSION: Port had higher cost in short term and less in long term compared with PICC. Patients expected to get intravenous administration more than 0.5 year should use Port if both direct and indirect costs were included.
