预防鼓室造口管溢耳局部治疗的成本效益:经济决策分析。

IF 1.8 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
OTO Open Pub Date : 2024-07-04 eCollection Date: 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1002/oto2.168
Grant Conner, Yuki Yoshiyasu, Nicholas Rossi, Brian McKinnon
{"title":"预防鼓室造口管溢耳局部治疗的成本效益:经济决策分析。","authors":"Grant Conner, Yuki Yoshiyasu, Nicholas Rossi, Brian McKinnon","doi":"10.1002/oto2.168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of various topical prophylaxis strategies against posttympanostomy otorrhea using a break-even analysis.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>An economic decision analysis of data collected from purchasing records and the literature.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>An academic center.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Costs of various strategies were calculated by querying our institution's pharmacy as well as GoodRX.com drug prices. Posttympanostomy otorrhea rates were acquired from a review of the literature. Costs for treatment of otorrhea were based upon our institution's self-pay patient charges. A break-even analysis was performed to determine the required absolute risk reduction ( <math> <mrow><mrow><mi>ARR</mi></mrow> </mrow> </math> ) in otorrhea rate to make prophylactic treatment cost-effective.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most expensive strategy ciprofloxacin/hydrocortisone otic ($626.83) was not cost-effective unless the rate of postoperative otorrhea was greater than 92% or if the cost of otorrhea treatment exceeded $4477.36. The cheapest antibiotic/steroid combination, ciprofloxacin/dexamethasone otic ($72.25) was cost-effective ( <math> <mrow><mrow><mi>ARR</mi></mrow> </mrow> </math> 10%). Using a conservative initial otorrhea rate (14%) and weighted cost of treatment ($683.39), the most expensive cost-effective prophylactic intervention possible was $95.67.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Prophylaxis against posttympanostomy otorrhea can be cost-effective. Physicians should consider the cost of prophylaxis at their institution as well as the patient's postoperative risk of otorrhea when making treatment decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":19697,"journal":{"name":"OTO Open","volume":"8 3","pages":"e168"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11222748/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-Effectiveness of Topical Prophylaxis Against Tympanostomy Tube Otorrhea: An Economic Decision Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Grant Conner, Yuki Yoshiyasu, Nicholas Rossi, Brian McKinnon\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/oto2.168\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of various topical prophylaxis strategies against posttympanostomy otorrhea using a break-even analysis.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>An economic decision analysis of data collected from purchasing records and the literature.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>An academic center.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Costs of various strategies were calculated by querying our institution's pharmacy as well as GoodRX.com drug prices. Posttympanostomy otorrhea rates were acquired from a review of the literature. Costs for treatment of otorrhea were based upon our institution's self-pay patient charges. A break-even analysis was performed to determine the required absolute risk reduction ( <math> <mrow><mrow><mi>ARR</mi></mrow> </mrow> </math> ) in otorrhea rate to make prophylactic treatment cost-effective.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most expensive strategy ciprofloxacin/hydrocortisone otic ($626.83) was not cost-effective unless the rate of postoperative otorrhea was greater than 92% or if the cost of otorrhea treatment exceeded $4477.36. The cheapest antibiotic/steroid combination, ciprofloxacin/dexamethasone otic ($72.25) was cost-effective ( <math> <mrow><mrow><mi>ARR</mi></mrow> </mrow> </math> 10%). Using a conservative initial otorrhea rate (14%) and weighted cost of treatment ($683.39), the most expensive cost-effective prophylactic intervention possible was $95.67.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Prophylaxis against posttympanostomy otorrhea can be cost-effective. Physicians should consider the cost of prophylaxis at their institution as well as the patient's postoperative risk of otorrhea when making treatment decisions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19697,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"OTO Open\",\"volume\":\"8 3\",\"pages\":\"e168\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11222748/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"OTO Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/oto2.168\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"OTO Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/oto2.168","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的采用盈亏平衡分析法,评估针对鼓室造口术后耳炎的各种局部预防策略的成本效益:研究设计: 对从采购记录和文献中收集的数据进行经济决策分析:方法方法:通过查询本机构的药房以及 GoodRX.com 的药品价格,计算各种策略的成本。鼓室造口术后耳鸣的发生率来自文献综述。治疗耳痛的费用是根据本院自费患者的收费标准计算得出的。我们进行了盈亏平衡分析,以确定使预防性治疗具有成本效益所需的耳道感染率绝对风险降低率(ARR):最昂贵的环丙沙星/氢化可的松耳药策略(626.83 美元)不具成本效益,除非术后耳鸣率超过 92%,或耳鸣治疗费用超过 4477.36 美元。最便宜的抗生素/类固醇药物组合环丙沙星/地塞米松耳药(72.25 美元)具有成本效益(ARR 10%)。根据保守的初始耳鸣率(14%)和加权治疗成本(683.39 美元),成本效益最高的预防性干预费用为 95.67 美元:结论:预防鼓室造口术后溢耳是符合成本效益的。医生在做出治疗决定时,应考虑所在医疗机构的预防成本以及患者术后发生耳鸣的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cost-Effectiveness of Topical Prophylaxis Against Tympanostomy Tube Otorrhea: An Economic Decision Analysis.

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of various topical prophylaxis strategies against posttympanostomy otorrhea using a break-even analysis.

Study design: An economic decision analysis of data collected from purchasing records and the literature.

Setting: An academic center.

Methods: Costs of various strategies were calculated by querying our institution's pharmacy as well as GoodRX.com drug prices. Posttympanostomy otorrhea rates were acquired from a review of the literature. Costs for treatment of otorrhea were based upon our institution's self-pay patient charges. A break-even analysis was performed to determine the required absolute risk reduction ( ARR ) in otorrhea rate to make prophylactic treatment cost-effective.

Results: The most expensive strategy ciprofloxacin/hydrocortisone otic ($626.83) was not cost-effective unless the rate of postoperative otorrhea was greater than 92% or if the cost of otorrhea treatment exceeded $4477.36. The cheapest antibiotic/steroid combination, ciprofloxacin/dexamethasone otic ($72.25) was cost-effective ( ARR 10%). Using a conservative initial otorrhea rate (14%) and weighted cost of treatment ($683.39), the most expensive cost-effective prophylactic intervention possible was $95.67.

Conclusion: Prophylaxis against posttympanostomy otorrhea can be cost-effective. Physicians should consider the cost of prophylaxis at their institution as well as the patient's postoperative risk of otorrhea when making treatment decisions.

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
OTO Open
OTO Open Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
115
审稿时长
15 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