创伤专科治疗的成本效益:一项系统综述。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Soualio Gnanou, Jason Robert Guertin, Pier-Alexandre Tardif, Blanchard Conombo, Mélanie Bérubé, Natalie Yanchar, Simon Berthelot, Janyce Gnanvi, Lynne Moore
{"title":"创伤专科治疗的成本效益:一项系统综述。","authors":"Soualio Gnanou, Jason Robert Guertin, Pier-Alexandre Tardif, Blanchard Conombo, Mélanie Bérubé, Natalie Yanchar, Simon Berthelot, Janyce Gnanvi, Lynne Moore","doi":"10.1177/13558196251348409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectivesSeveral meta-analyses have shown the effectiveness of specialized trauma care, but evidence on cost and cost-effectiveness remains unestablished. We aimed to systematically review evidence on the cost or cost-effectiveness of hospitals specialized in advanced trauma care compared to non or less-specialized hospitals.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web-of-Science, EconLit, and grey literature up until June 2024. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and extracted relevant data. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklist. Per Cochrane recommendations, findings were synthesized qualitatively.ResultsWe identified 4 cost-effectiveness, 3 cost-consequence, and 3 cost-analysis studies, mostly US-based retrospective cohorts. Reporting quality was rated high for 4 studies. All cost-effectiveness studies found specialized trauma centres to be more costly but more effective than non-specialized centres, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from 655 to 46,175 Int.$2022 (2022 international dollars) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, 43,208 to 999,912 Int.$2022 per life-saved, and 48,567 Int.$2022 per life-year gained. Among cost-consequence studies, two found specialized trauma centres to be costlier and less effective, while one found the opposite. All cost analyses indicated higher costs at specialized trauma centres.ConclusionsFull economic evaluations identified in this review suggest that specialized trauma care may be cost-effective according to a threshold of $50,000 per QALY. However, our ability to draw conclusions is hampered by the low number of studies, high heterogeneity in study populations and settings, and lack of consideration of trauma systems and of costs beyond the acute phase. Results highlight a critical gap in evidence to guide policymakers in the development of cost-efficient trauma systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":15953,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","volume":" ","pages":"13558196251348409"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-effectiveness of specialized trauma care: A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Soualio Gnanou, Jason Robert Guertin, Pier-Alexandre Tardif, Blanchard Conombo, Mélanie Bérubé, Natalie Yanchar, Simon Berthelot, Janyce Gnanvi, Lynne Moore\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13558196251348409\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>ObjectivesSeveral meta-analyses have shown the effectiveness of specialized trauma care, but evidence on cost and cost-effectiveness remains unestablished. We aimed to systematically review evidence on the cost or cost-effectiveness of hospitals specialized in advanced trauma care compared to non or less-specialized hospitals.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web-of-Science, EconLit, and grey literature up until June 2024. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and extracted relevant data. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklist. Per Cochrane recommendations, findings were synthesized qualitatively.ResultsWe identified 4 cost-effectiveness, 3 cost-consequence, and 3 cost-analysis studies, mostly US-based retrospective cohorts. Reporting quality was rated high for 4 studies. All cost-effectiveness studies found specialized trauma centres to be more costly but more effective than non-specialized centres, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from 655 to 46,175 Int.$2022 (2022 international dollars) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, 43,208 to 999,912 Int.$2022 per life-saved, and 48,567 Int.$2022 per life-year gained. Among cost-consequence studies, two found specialized trauma centres to be costlier and less effective, while one found the opposite. All cost analyses indicated higher costs at specialized trauma centres.ConclusionsFull economic evaluations identified in this review suggest that specialized trauma care may be cost-effective according to a threshold of $50,000 per QALY. However, our ability to draw conclusions is hampered by the low number of studies, high heterogeneity in study populations and settings, and lack of consideration of trauma systems and of costs beyond the acute phase. Results highlight a critical gap in evidence to guide policymakers in the development of cost-efficient trauma systems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"13558196251348409\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13558196251348409\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13558196251348409","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:几项荟萃分析显示了专门创伤护理的有效性,但关于成本和成本效益的证据仍未建立。我们的目的是系统地回顾专门从事高级创伤护理的医院与非或不太专业的医院相比的成本或成本效益的证据。方法:我们按照系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目进行了系统评价。我们检索了PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web-of-Science, EconLit和截至2024年6月的灰色文献。两名审稿人独立评估合格性并提取相关数据。报告质量采用综合卫生经济评估报告标准(CHEERS) 2022检查表进行评估。根据Cochrane的建议,研究结果是定性合成的。结果:我们确定了4项成本-效果研究、3项成本-后果研究和3项成本分析研究,主要是基于美国的回顾性队列研究。4项研究报告质量被评为高。所有成本效益研究都发现,专业创伤中心比非专业中心更昂贵,但更有效,增量成本效益比从655到46,175 Int不等。每个质量调整生命年(QALY)增加43,208美元至999,912美元。每拯救一条生命要支付2022美元,还有48567美元。每生命年增加2022美元。在成本后果研究中,有两项研究发现专门的创伤中心成本更高,效果更差,而另一项研究则相反。所有的费用分析表明,在专门的创伤中心费用较高。结论:本综述中确定的全面经济评估表明,根据每个QALY 50,000美元的阈值,专门的创伤护理可能具有成本效益。然而,我们得出结论的能力受到研究数量少、研究人群和环境的高度异质性以及缺乏对创伤系统和急性期后费用的考虑的阻碍。结果突出了指导决策者开发成本效益高的创伤系统的证据的关键差距。
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 specialized trauma care: A systematic review.

ObjectivesSeveral meta-analyses have shown the effectiveness of specialized trauma care, but evidence on cost and cost-effectiveness remains unestablished. We aimed to systematically review evidence on the cost or cost-effectiveness of hospitals specialized in advanced trauma care compared to non or less-specialized hospitals.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web-of-Science, EconLit, and grey literature up until June 2024. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and extracted relevant data. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklist. Per Cochrane recommendations, findings were synthesized qualitatively.ResultsWe identified 4 cost-effectiveness, 3 cost-consequence, and 3 cost-analysis studies, mostly US-based retrospective cohorts. Reporting quality was rated high for 4 studies. All cost-effectiveness studies found specialized trauma centres to be more costly but more effective than non-specialized centres, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from 655 to 46,175 Int.$2022 (2022 international dollars) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, 43,208 to 999,912 Int.$2022 per life-saved, and 48,567 Int.$2022 per life-year gained. Among cost-consequence studies, two found specialized trauma centres to be costlier and less effective, while one found the opposite. All cost analyses indicated higher costs at specialized trauma centres.ConclusionsFull economic evaluations identified in this review suggest that specialized trauma care may be cost-effective according to a threshold of $50,000 per QALY. However, our ability to draw conclusions is hampered by the low number of studies, high heterogeneity in study populations and settings, and lack of consideration of trauma systems and of costs beyond the acute phase. Results highlight a critical gap in evidence to guide policymakers in the development of cost-efficient trauma systems.

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
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Journal of Health Services Research & Policy provides a unique opportunity to explore the ideas, policies and decisions shaping health services throughout the world. Edited and peer-reviewed by experts in the field and with a high academic standard and multidisciplinary approach, readers will gain a greater understanding of the current issues in healthcare policy and research. The journal"s strong international editorial advisory board also ensures that readers obtain a truly global and insightful perspective.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信