{"title":"医院-家庭和粪便微生物群移植治疗老年艰难梭菌患者的成本-效果。","authors":"Renée Hangaard Olesen,Emma Bendix Larsen,Tone Rubak,Simon Mark Dahl Baunwall,Sara Ellegaard Paaske,Merete Gregersen,Catherine Hauerslev Foss,Christian Erikstrup,Camilla Birch Krogh,Lars Holger Ehlers,Christian Lodberg Hvas","doi":"10.1093/cid/ciaf104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nClostridioides difficile infection (CDI) primarily affects older patients with comorbid conditions and has a high mortality rate. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is effective and cost-effective for CDI. In a recent study, we demonstrated the clinical benefits of combining hospital-at-home care with FMT for older patients with CDI, but its cost-effectiveness remains unknown. The current study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the intervention in patients aged ≥70 years with CDI, compared with standard treatment.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nThe cost-utility analysis was conducted using data from a randomized clinical trial enrolling 217 patients, assessing the cost-effectiveness of the intervention over 90 days. Resource use was assessed from a healthcare sector perspective. Missing data were handled with proxy replacement and multiple imputation. Sensitivity analyses included probabilistic analysis, complete case analysis, adjustment of key unit prices, and a hospital perspective. A willingness-to-pay threshold was set to €22 994 or $24 863 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nIn the base case analysis, the intervention was dominant, with mean cost savings of €2556 ($2764) and a mean gain of 0.004 QALY. Although resource use was higher, the intervention resulted in an average reduction of 6 hospital admission days per patient and increased odds of clinical resolution. The results remained robust across different perspectives, the exclusion of patients with missing data, and variations in hospital admission costs.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nIn patients aged ≥70 years with CDI, an intervention combining hospital-at-home care and FMT is cost-effective compared with standard treatment. The cost-effectiveness is mainly driven by fewer hospital admission days.","PeriodicalId":10463,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Infectious Diseases","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-Effectiveness of Hospital-at-Home and Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Treating Older Patients With Clostridioides difficile.\",\"authors\":\"Renée Hangaard Olesen,Emma Bendix Larsen,Tone Rubak,Simon Mark Dahl Baunwall,Sara Ellegaard Paaske,Merete Gregersen,Catherine Hauerslev Foss,Christian Erikstrup,Camilla Birch Krogh,Lars Holger Ehlers,Christian Lodberg Hvas\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/cid/ciaf104\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\r\\nClostridioides difficile infection (CDI) primarily affects older patients with comorbid conditions and has a high mortality rate. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is effective and cost-effective for CDI. In a recent study, we demonstrated the clinical benefits of combining hospital-at-home care with FMT for older patients with CDI, but its cost-effectiveness remains unknown. The current study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the intervention in patients aged ≥70 years with CDI, compared with standard treatment.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHODS\\r\\nThe cost-utility analysis was conducted using data from a randomized clinical trial enrolling 217 patients, assessing the cost-effectiveness of the intervention over 90 days. Resource use was assessed from a healthcare sector perspective. Missing data were handled with proxy replacement and multiple imputation. Sensitivity analyses included probabilistic analysis, complete case analysis, adjustment of key unit prices, and a hospital perspective. A willingness-to-pay threshold was set to €22 994 or $24 863 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).\\r\\n\\r\\nRESULTS\\r\\nIn the base case analysis, the intervention was dominant, with mean cost savings of €2556 ($2764) and a mean gain of 0.004 QALY. Although resource use was higher, the intervention resulted in an average reduction of 6 hospital admission days per patient and increased odds of clinical resolution. The results remained robust across different perspectives, the exclusion of patients with missing data, and variations in hospital admission costs.\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSIONS\\r\\nIn patients aged ≥70 years with CDI, an intervention combining hospital-at-home care and FMT is cost-effective compared with standard treatment. The cost-effectiveness is mainly driven by fewer hospital admission days.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10463,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Infectious Diseases\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Infectious Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaf104\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaf104","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Cost-Effectiveness of Hospital-at-Home and Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Treating Older Patients With Clostridioides difficile.
BACKGROUND
Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) primarily affects older patients with comorbid conditions and has a high mortality rate. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is effective and cost-effective for CDI. In a recent study, we demonstrated the clinical benefits of combining hospital-at-home care with FMT for older patients with CDI, but its cost-effectiveness remains unknown. The current study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the intervention in patients aged ≥70 years with CDI, compared with standard treatment.
METHODS
The cost-utility analysis was conducted using data from a randomized clinical trial enrolling 217 patients, assessing the cost-effectiveness of the intervention over 90 days. Resource use was assessed from a healthcare sector perspective. Missing data were handled with proxy replacement and multiple imputation. Sensitivity analyses included probabilistic analysis, complete case analysis, adjustment of key unit prices, and a hospital perspective. A willingness-to-pay threshold was set to €22 994 or $24 863 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).
RESULTS
In the base case analysis, the intervention was dominant, with mean cost savings of €2556 ($2764) and a mean gain of 0.004 QALY. Although resource use was higher, the intervention resulted in an average reduction of 6 hospital admission days per patient and increased odds of clinical resolution. The results remained robust across different perspectives, the exclusion of patients with missing data, and variations in hospital admission costs.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients aged ≥70 years with CDI, an intervention combining hospital-at-home care and FMT is cost-effective compared with standard treatment. The cost-effectiveness is mainly driven by fewer hospital admission days.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Infectious Diseases (CID) is dedicated to publishing original research, reviews, guidelines, and perspectives with the potential to reshape clinical practice, providing clinicians with valuable insights for patient care. CID comprehensively addresses the clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of a wide spectrum of infectious diseases. The journal places a high priority on the assessment of current and innovative treatments, microbiology, immunology, and policies, ensuring relevance to patient care in its commitment to advancing the field of infectious diseases.