Cost-Effectiveness of Humidified High-Flow Therapy (HHFT) for COPD Patients on Long-Term Oxygen Therapy.

IF 2.1 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Erik J Groessl, Steven R Tally, Naomi Hillery
{"title":"Cost-Effectiveness of Humidified High-Flow Therapy (HHFT) for COPD Patients on Long-Term Oxygen Therapy.","authors":"Erik J Groessl,&nbsp;Steven R Tally,&nbsp;Naomi Hillery","doi":"10.2147/CEOR.S400739","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of mortality, and is associated with significant respiratory impairment, decreased quality of life, and high health care costs. Recent evidence indicates significant clinical benefit results from adding humidified high-flow therapy (HHFT) to standard long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) as a home-based therapy in persons with severe COPD. The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding HHFT to standard treatment of COPD patients using LTOT with US healthcare cost estimates.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A Markov state-transition model was developed using data from a prospective clinical trial of adding HHFT to standard therapy for persons with severe COPD using LTOT. The analysis was conducted from the US health care system perspective using a 5-year time horizon and 3% discount rate. QALYs and downstream healthcare costs were modeled. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to examine the impact of input parameters on the incremental net monetary benefit (NMB).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Incremental QALYs accrued were 0.058 (2.047 vs 1.989 QALYs for HHFT and standard therapy groups respectively). Incremental total costs were -$3939 ($47,516 vs $51,455 for HHFT and standard therapy groups respectively). Thus, HHFT was the dominant treatment in the analysis, resulting on both better health and lower total costs. Varying utility and cost inputs individually never resulted in NMB approaching 0. Probabilistic analyses indicate that HHFT is cost-effective in 84% of simulations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results indicate that the reductions in acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPDs) that result from adding HHFT for persons with COPD on LTOT will produce both health benefit (QALYs) and cost savings. Cost savings occur because the HHFT device costs are more than offset by reductions in costly COPD exacerbations. Health care systems and payors can benefit from wider implementation of HHFT with existing treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":47313,"journal":{"name":"ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ef/72/ceor-15-239.PMC10083032.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S400739","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of mortality, and is associated with significant respiratory impairment, decreased quality of life, and high health care costs. Recent evidence indicates significant clinical benefit results from adding humidified high-flow therapy (HHFT) to standard long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) as a home-based therapy in persons with severe COPD. The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding HHFT to standard treatment of COPD patients using LTOT with US healthcare cost estimates.

Patients and methods: A Markov state-transition model was developed using data from a prospective clinical trial of adding HHFT to standard therapy for persons with severe COPD using LTOT. The analysis was conducted from the US health care system perspective using a 5-year time horizon and 3% discount rate. QALYs and downstream healthcare costs were modeled. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to examine the impact of input parameters on the incremental net monetary benefit (NMB).

Results: Incremental QALYs accrued were 0.058 (2.047 vs 1.989 QALYs for HHFT and standard therapy groups respectively). Incremental total costs were -$3939 ($47,516 vs $51,455 for HHFT and standard therapy groups respectively). Thus, HHFT was the dominant treatment in the analysis, resulting on both better health and lower total costs. Varying utility and cost inputs individually never resulted in NMB approaching 0. Probabilistic analyses indicate that HHFT is cost-effective in 84% of simulations.

Conclusion: Our results indicate that the reductions in acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPDs) that result from adding HHFT for persons with COPD on LTOT will produce both health benefit (QALYs) and cost savings. Cost savings occur because the HHFT device costs are more than offset by reductions in costly COPD exacerbations. Health care systems and payors can benefit from wider implementation of HHFT with existing treatments.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

湿化高流量治疗(HHFT)对COPD患者长期氧疗的成本-效果
目的:慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)是导致死亡的第三大原因,与严重的呼吸功能障碍、生活质量下降和高昂的医疗费用相关。最近的证据表明,将湿化高流量治疗(HHFT)添加到标准长期氧疗(LTOT)中作为重度COPD患者的家庭治疗有显著的临床益处。目的是评估将HHFT加入使用LTOT的COPD患者标准治疗的成本效益和美国医疗保健成本估算。患者和方法:利用一项前瞻性临床试验的数据,建立了一个马尔可夫状态转移模型,该试验将HHFT添加到使用LTOT的重度COPD患者的标准治疗中。该分析是从美国医疗保健系统的角度进行的,采用5年的时间范围和3%的贴现率。对质量aly和下游医疗保健成本进行了建模。使用单向和概率敏感性分析来检验输入参数对增量净货币效益(NMB)的影响。结果:累积的QALYs增量为0.058 (HHFT组和标准治疗组分别为2.047 vs 1.989 QALYs)。增量总成本为- 3939美元(HHFT和标准治疗组分别为47,516美元和51,455美元)。因此,在分析中,HHFT是主要的治疗方法,导致更好的健康和更低的总成本。不同的效用和成本投入不会导致NMB接近0。概率分析表明,在84%的模拟中,HHFT具有成本效益。结论:我们的研究结果表明,慢性阻塞性肺病患者在LTOT上增加HHFT所导致的慢性阻塞性肺病急性加重(AECOPDs)的减少将产生健康效益(QALYs)和成本节约。成本的节省是因为HHFT设备的成本被昂贵的COPD恶化的减少所抵消。卫生保健系统和付款人可以从现有治疗方法的更广泛实施中受益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
83
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信