Benjamin Herzel, Neev Batavia, Paul Gavaza, Tammy Phan, Emmelyn Samones, Anne-Michelle Ruha, Jakub Furmaga, Christopher Hoyte, Brian J Wolk
{"title":"抗蛇毒血清的成本:使用北美蛇咬伤登记处的成本最小化研究。","authors":"Benjamin Herzel, Neev Batavia, Paul Gavaza, Tammy Phan, Emmelyn Samones, Anne-Michelle Ruha, Jakub Furmaga, Christopher Hoyte, Brian J Wolk","doi":"10.1007/s13181-025-01072-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Envenomation is a global health issue, with over 9,000 encounters managed in the United States yearly. The introduction of immunoglobulin fragment antivenom has reduced the risk of hypersensitivity. This study compares treatment costs of crotaline envenomation using the Fab and F(ab')<sub>2</sub> antivenoms as reported to the North American Snakebite Registry (NASBR), a nationwide surveillance tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective analysis of NASBR data between 2018 and 2020. The following data points were assessed: patient demographics (age, gender, race), snake species, type of antivenom used, and treatment costs. Unit costs were estimated based on United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data. Average (mean) per patient costs from the payer perspective were calculated by multiplying resources by the unit costs. Sensitivity analyses were performed regarding cost variance and snake species. All costs reported in this study are in U.S. dollars.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average total cost of treatment was $31,343 per person, with medications contributing 72% of the total. Average total cost among patients who received Fab treatments was $33,347 per person compared to $19,747 among patients who received F(ab')<sub>2</sub>. Antivenom costs accounted for 75% of the total cost in the Fab group and 42% in the F(ab')<sub>2</sub> group. F(ab')<sub>2</sub> required more vials than Fab (median 18 versus 10). Non-antivenom costs such as hospitalizations were higher in the F(ab')<sub>2</sub> group. Using average sale prices increased average total cost to $52,572; Fab remained more expensive.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Antivenom is the primary cost driver in snakebite treatment in North America. Treatment with F(ab')<sub>2</sub> resulted in lower overall costs, driven by lower cost of antivenom. F(ab')<sub>2</sub> did not significantly lower overall resource use except for blood product administration.</p>","PeriodicalId":16429,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Toxicology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Cost of Antivenom: A Cost Minimization Study using the North American Snakebite Registry.\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Herzel, Neev Batavia, Paul Gavaza, Tammy Phan, Emmelyn Samones, Anne-Michelle Ruha, Jakub Furmaga, Christopher Hoyte, Brian J Wolk\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13181-025-01072-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Envenomation is a global health issue, with over 9,000 encounters managed in the United States yearly. The introduction of immunoglobulin fragment antivenom has reduced the risk of hypersensitivity. This study compares treatment costs of crotaline envenomation using the Fab and F(ab')<sub>2</sub> antivenoms as reported to the North American Snakebite Registry (NASBR), a nationwide surveillance tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective analysis of NASBR data between 2018 and 2020. The following data points were assessed: patient demographics (age, gender, race), snake species, type of antivenom used, and treatment costs. Unit costs were estimated based on United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data. Average (mean) per patient costs from the payer perspective were calculated by multiplying resources by the unit costs. Sensitivity analyses were performed regarding cost variance and snake species. All costs reported in this study are in U.S. dollars.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average total cost of treatment was $31,343 per person, with medications contributing 72% of the total. Average total cost among patients who received Fab treatments was $33,347 per person compared to $19,747 among patients who received F(ab')<sub>2</sub>. Antivenom costs accounted for 75% of the total cost in the Fab group and 42% in the F(ab')<sub>2</sub> group. F(ab')<sub>2</sub> required more vials than Fab (median 18 versus 10). Non-antivenom costs such as hospitalizations were higher in the F(ab')<sub>2</sub> group. Using average sale prices increased average total cost to $52,572; Fab remained more expensive.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Antivenom is the primary cost driver in snakebite treatment in North America. Treatment with F(ab')<sub>2</sub> resulted in lower overall costs, driven by lower cost of antivenom. F(ab')<sub>2</sub> did not significantly lower overall resource use except for blood product administration.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16429,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Toxicology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Toxicology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13181-025-01072-x\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"TOXICOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13181-025-01072-x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Cost of Antivenom: A Cost Minimization Study using the North American Snakebite Registry.
Envenomation is a global health issue, with over 9,000 encounters managed in the United States yearly. The introduction of immunoglobulin fragment antivenom has reduced the risk of hypersensitivity. This study compares treatment costs of crotaline envenomation using the Fab and F(ab')2 antivenoms as reported to the North American Snakebite Registry (NASBR), a nationwide surveillance tool.
Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of NASBR data between 2018 and 2020. The following data points were assessed: patient demographics (age, gender, race), snake species, type of antivenom used, and treatment costs. Unit costs were estimated based on United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data. Average (mean) per patient costs from the payer perspective were calculated by multiplying resources by the unit costs. Sensitivity analyses were performed regarding cost variance and snake species. All costs reported in this study are in U.S. dollars.
Results: The average total cost of treatment was $31,343 per person, with medications contributing 72% of the total. Average total cost among patients who received Fab treatments was $33,347 per person compared to $19,747 among patients who received F(ab')2. Antivenom costs accounted for 75% of the total cost in the Fab group and 42% in the F(ab')2 group. F(ab')2 required more vials than Fab (median 18 versus 10). Non-antivenom costs such as hospitalizations were higher in the F(ab')2 group. Using average sale prices increased average total cost to $52,572; Fab remained more expensive.
Conclusion: Antivenom is the primary cost driver in snakebite treatment in North America. Treatment with F(ab')2 resulted in lower overall costs, driven by lower cost of antivenom. F(ab')2 did not significantly lower overall resource use except for blood product administration.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Medical Toxicology (JMT) is a peer-reviewed medical journal dedicated to advances in clinical toxicology, focusing on the diagnosis, management, and prevention of poisoning and other adverse health effects resulting from medications, chemicals, occupational and environmental substances, and biological hazards. As the official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology (ACMT), JMT is managed by an editorial board of clinicians as well as scientists and thus publishes research that is relevant to medical toxicologists, emergency physicians, critical care specialists, pediatricians, pre-hospital providers, occupational physicians, substance abuse experts, veterinary toxicologists, and policy makers. JMT articles generate considerable interest in the lay media, with 2016 JMT articles cited by various social media sites, the Boston Globe, and the Washington Post among others. For questions or comments about the journal, please contact jmtinfo@acmt.net.
For questions or comments about the journal, please contact jmtinfo@acmt.net.