...
首页> 外文期刊>Critical care medicine >Cost-Effectiveness of Histamine-Receptor-2 Antagonist Versus Proton Pump Inhibitor for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Critically III Patients
【24h】

Cost-Effectiveness of Histamine-Receptor-2 Antagonist Versus Proton Pump Inhibitor for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Critically III Patients

机译:组胺受体2拮抗剂与质子泵抑制剂对重症III期患者预防应激性溃疡的成本效果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective: To examine the cost-effectiveness of using histamine receptor-2 antagonist or proton pump inhibitor for stress ulcer prophylaxis. Design: Decision analysis model examining costs and effectiveness of using histamine receptor-2 antagonist or proton pump inhibitor for stress ulcer prophylaxis. Costs were expressed in 2012 U.S. dollars from the perspective of the institution and included drug regimens and the following outcomes: clinically significant stress-related mucosal bleed, ventilator-associated pneumonia, and Clostridium difficile infection. Effectiveness was the mortality risk associated with these outcomes and represented by survival. Costs, occurrence rates, and mortality probabilities were extracted from published data. Setting: A simulation model. Patents: A mixed adult ICU population. Interventions: Histamine receptor-2 antagonist or proton pump inhibitor for 9 days of stress ulcer prophylaxis therapy. Main Measurements and Results: Output variables were expected costs, expected survival rates, incremental cost, and incremental survival rate. Univariate sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine the drivers of incremental cost and incremental survival. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted using second-order Monte Carlo simulation. For the base case analysis, the expected cost of providing stress ulcer prophylaxis was $6,707 with histamine receptor-2 antagonist and $7,802 with proton pump inhibitor, resulting in a cost saving of $1,095 with histamine receptor-2 antagonist. The associated mortality probabilities were 3.819% and 3.825%, respectively, resulting in an absolute survival benefit of 0.006% with histamine receptor-2 antagonist. The primary drivers of incremental cost and survival were the assumptions surrounding ventilator-associated pneumonia and bleed. The probabilities that histamine receptor-2 antagonist was less costly and provided favorable survival were 89.4% and 55.7%, respectively. A secondary analysis assuming equal rates of C. difficile infection showed a cost saving of $908 with histamine receptor-2 antagonists, but the survival benefit of 0.0167% favored proton pump inhibitors. Conclusions: Histamine receptor-2 antagonist therapy appears to reduce costs with survival benefit comparable to proton pump inhibitor therapy for stress ulcer prophylaxis. Ventilator-associated pneumonia and bleed are the variables most affecting these outcomes. The uncertainty in the findings justifies a prospective trial.
机译:目的:探讨使用组胺受体2拮抗剂或质子泵抑制剂预防应激性溃疡的成本效益。设计:决策分析模型,检查使用组胺受体2拮抗剂或质子泵抑制剂预防应激性溃疡的成本和有效性。从机构的角度讲,费用以2012年的美元表示,包括药物治疗和以下结果:临床上与压力有关的重大粘膜出血,呼吸机相关性肺炎和艰难梭菌感染。有效性是与这些结果相关并以生存为代表的死亡风险。成本,发生率和死亡率从已发布的数据中提取。设置:模拟模型。专利:ICU成人混合人群。干预措施:组胺受体2拮抗剂或质子泵抑制剂用于应激性溃疡预防治疗9天。主要度量和结果:输出变量是预期成本,预期生存率,增量成本和增量生存率。进行了单因素敏感性分析,以确定增加成本和增加生存的驱动力。使用二阶蒙特卡洛模拟进行概率敏感性分析。对于基本案例分析,使用组胺受体2拮抗剂提供预防应激性溃疡的预期成本为$ 6,707,使用质子泵抑制剂为$ 7,802,使用组胺受体2拮抗剂可节省$ 1,095。相关的死亡率分别为3.819%和3.825%,从而导致组胺受体2拮抗剂的绝对生存获益为0.006%。增加成本和生存的主要驱动力是围绕呼吸机相关性肺炎和出血的假设。组胺受体2拮抗剂成本较低且提供良好生存的可能性分别为89.4%和55.7%。假设艰难梭菌感染率相同的次要分析显示,使用组胺受体2拮抗剂可节省908美元的成本,但0.0167%的生存期受益于质子泵抑制剂。结论:组胺受体2拮抗剂治疗似乎可以降低成本,具有与质子泵抑制剂治疗相当的生存益处,可预防应激性溃疡。呼吸机相关性肺炎和出血是最影响这些结果的变量。结果的不确定性证明了前瞻性试验的合理性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号