芬兰配备医生的直升机紧急医疗服务与地面紧急医疗服务相比的成本效益估算

Q3 Nursing
Axel Ackermann MBBS , Jukka Pappinen PhD , Jouni Nurmi MD, PhD , Hilla Nordquist PhD , Paulus Torkki PhD
{"title":"芬兰配备医生的直升机紧急医疗服务与地面紧急医疗服务相比的成本效益估算","authors":"Axel Ackermann MBBS ,&nbsp;Jukka Pappinen PhD ,&nbsp;Jouni Nurmi MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Hilla Nordquist PhD ,&nbsp;Paulus Torkki PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.amj.2023.12.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Because the unit cost of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) is higher than traditional ground-based emergency medical services (EMS), it is important to further investigate the impact of HEMS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of physician-staffed HEMS compared with ground-based EMS in Finland under current practices.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was evaluated using the differences in outcomes and costs between HEMS and ground-based EMS. The estimated mortality within 30 days and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to measure health benefits. Quality of life was estimated according to the EuroQoL scale, and a 1-way sensitivity analysis was conducted on the QALY indexes ranging from 0.6 to 0.8. Survival rates were calculated according to the national HEMS database, and the cost structure was estimated at 48 million euros based on financial statements.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>HEMS prevented the 30-day mortality of 68.1 patients annually, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €43,688 to €56,918/QALY. Fixed costs accounted for 93% of HEMS expenses because of 24/7 operations, making the capacity utilization rate a major determinant of total costs.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>HEMS intervention is cost-effective compared with ground-based EMS and is acceptable from a societal willingness-to-pay perspective. These findings contribute valuable insights for health care management decision making and highlight the need for future research for service optimization.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":35737,"journal":{"name":"Air Medical Journal","volume":"43 3","pages":"Pages 229-235"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1067991X23002730/pdfft?md5=f5686b12afcdd4b26c9bdb87d80dce8d&pid=1-s2.0-S1067991X23002730-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Estimated Cost-Effectiveness of Physician-Staffed Helicopter Emergency Medical Services Compared to Ground-Based Emergency Medical Services in Finland\",\"authors\":\"Axel Ackermann MBBS ,&nbsp;Jukka Pappinen PhD ,&nbsp;Jouni Nurmi MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Hilla Nordquist PhD ,&nbsp;Paulus Torkki PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.amj.2023.12.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Because the unit cost of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) is higher than traditional ground-based emergency medical services (EMS), it is important to further investigate the impact of HEMS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of physician-staffed HEMS compared with ground-based EMS in Finland under current practices.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was evaluated using the differences in outcomes and costs between HEMS and ground-based EMS. The estimated mortality within 30 days and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to measure health benefits. Quality of life was estimated according to the EuroQoL scale, and a 1-way sensitivity analysis was conducted on the QALY indexes ranging from 0.6 to 0.8. Survival rates were calculated according to the national HEMS database, and the cost structure was estimated at 48 million euros based on financial statements.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>HEMS prevented the 30-day mortality of 68.1 patients annually, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €43,688 to €56,918/QALY. Fixed costs accounted for 93% of HEMS expenses because of 24/7 operations, making the capacity utilization rate a major determinant of total costs.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>HEMS intervention is cost-effective compared with ground-based EMS and is acceptable from a societal willingness-to-pay perspective. These findings contribute valuable insights for health care management decision making and highlight the need for future research for service optimization.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35737,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Air Medical Journal\",\"volume\":\"43 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 229-235\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1067991X23002730/pdfft?md5=f5686b12afcdd4b26c9bdb87d80dce8d&pid=1-s2.0-S1067991X23002730-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Air Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1067991X23002730\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Air Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1067991X23002730","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的由于直升机紧急医疗服务 (HEMS) 的单位成本高于传统的地面紧急医疗服务 (EMS),因此进一步调查 HEMS 的影响非常重要。本研究的目的是评估在芬兰,在目前的做法下,由医生参与的直升机急救服务与地面急救服务相比的成本效益。方法利用直升机急救服务与地面急救服务在结果和成本上的差异评估增量成本效益比。30 天内的估计死亡率和质量调整生命年 (QALY) 用于衡量健康效益。生活质量根据欧洲生活质量量表进行估算,并对 0.6 至 0.8 的 QALY 指数进行了单向敏感性分析。根据国家 HEMS 数据库计算了存活率,并根据财务报表估算出成本结构为 4800 万欧元。结果 HEMS 每年可避免 68.1 名患者在 30 天内死亡,增量成本效益比为 43688 欧元至 56918 欧元/QALY。由于全天候运行,固定成本占急救服务费用的 93%,因此容量利用率是决定总成本的主要因素。结论与地面急救服务相比,急救服务干预具有成本效益,从社会支付意愿的角度来看是可以接受的。这些发现为医疗保健管理决策提供了宝贵的见解,并强调了未来优化服务研究的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Estimated Cost-Effectiveness of Physician-Staffed Helicopter Emergency Medical Services Compared to Ground-Based Emergency Medical Services in Finland

Objective

Because the unit cost of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) is higher than traditional ground-based emergency medical services (EMS), it is important to further investigate the impact of HEMS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of physician-staffed HEMS compared with ground-based EMS in Finland under current practices.

Methods

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was evaluated using the differences in outcomes and costs between HEMS and ground-based EMS. The estimated mortality within 30 days and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to measure health benefits. Quality of life was estimated according to the EuroQoL scale, and a 1-way sensitivity analysis was conducted on the QALY indexes ranging from 0.6 to 0.8. Survival rates were calculated according to the national HEMS database, and the cost structure was estimated at 48 million euros based on financial statements.

Results

HEMS prevented the 30-day mortality of 68.1 patients annually, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €43,688 to €56,918/QALY. Fixed costs accounted for 93% of HEMS expenses because of 24/7 operations, making the capacity utilization rate a major determinant of total costs.

Conclusion

HEMS intervention is cost-effective compared with ground-based EMS and is acceptable from a societal willingness-to-pay perspective. These findings contribute valuable insights for health care management decision making and highlight the need for future research for service optimization.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Air Medical Journal
Air Medical Journal Nursing-Emergency Nursing
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
112
审稿时长
69 days
期刊介绍: Air Medical Journal is the official journal of the five leading air medical transport associations in the United States. AMJ is the premier provider of information for the medical transport industry, addressing the unique concerns of medical transport physicians, nurses, pilots, paramedics, emergency medical technicians, communication specialists, and program administrators. The journal contains practical how-to articles, debates on controversial industry issues, legislative updates, case studies, and peer-reviewed original research articles covering all aspects of the medical transport profession.
×
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