早期类风湿关节炎联合治疗的成本-效果和成本-效用:联合降压强的松龙、甲氨蝶呤和磺胺嘧啶与单独磺胺嘧啶的随机比较COBRA试验组。联合治疗Bij Reumatoïde关节炎。

A C Verhoeven, J C Bibo, M Boers, G L Engel, S van der Linden
{"title":"早期类风湿关节炎联合治疗的成本-效果和成本-效用:联合降压强的松龙、甲氨蝶呤和磺胺嘧啶与单独磺胺嘧啶的随机比较COBRA试验组。联合治疗Bij Reumatoïde关节炎。","authors":"A C Verhoeven,&nbsp;J C Bibo,&nbsp;M Boers,&nbsp;G L Engel,&nbsp;S van der Linden","doi":"10.1093/rheumatology/37.10.1102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Assessment of the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of early intervention in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, with combined step-down prednisolone, methotrexate and sulphasalazine, compared to sulphasalazine alone.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Multicentre 56 week randomized double-blind trial with full economic analysis of direct costs and utility analysis with rating scale and standard gamble measurement techniques.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The combined-treatment group included 76 patients and the sulphasalazine group 78 patients. The mean total costs per patient in the first 56 weeks of follow-up were $5519 for combined treatment and $6511 for treatment with sulphasalazine alone (P = 0.37). Out-patient care, in-patient care and non-health care each contributed about one-third to the total costs. The combined-treatment group appeared to generate savings in the length of hospital stay for RA, non-protocol drugs and costs of home help, but comparisons were not statistically significant. Protocol drugs and monitoring were slightly more expensive in the combined-treatment group. Clinical, radiographic and functional outcomes significantly favoured combined treatment at week 28 (radiography also at week 56). Utility scores also favoured combined treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Combined treatment is cost-effective due to enhanced efficacy at lower or equal direct costs.</p>","PeriodicalId":9307,"journal":{"name":"British journal of rheumatology","volume":"37 10","pages":"1102-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/rheumatology/37.10.1102","citationCount":"74","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of combination therapy in early rheumatoid arthritis: randomized comparison of combined step-down prednisolone, methotrexate and sulphasalazine with sulphasalazine alone. COBRA Trial Group. Combinatietherapie Bij Reumatoïde Artritis.\",\"authors\":\"A C Verhoeven,&nbsp;J C Bibo,&nbsp;M Boers,&nbsp;G L Engel,&nbsp;S van der Linden\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/rheumatology/37.10.1102\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Assessment of the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of early intervention in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, with combined step-down prednisolone, methotrexate and sulphasalazine, compared to sulphasalazine alone.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Multicentre 56 week randomized double-blind trial with full economic analysis of direct costs and utility analysis with rating scale and standard gamble measurement techniques.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The combined-treatment group included 76 patients and the sulphasalazine group 78 patients. The mean total costs per patient in the first 56 weeks of follow-up were $5519 for combined treatment and $6511 for treatment with sulphasalazine alone (P = 0.37). Out-patient care, in-patient care and non-health care each contributed about one-third to the total costs. The combined-treatment group appeared to generate savings in the length of hospital stay for RA, non-protocol drugs and costs of home help, but comparisons were not statistically significant. Protocol drugs and monitoring were slightly more expensive in the combined-treatment group. Clinical, radiographic and functional outcomes significantly favoured combined treatment at week 28 (radiography also at week 56). Utility scores also favoured combined treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Combined treatment is cost-effective due to enhanced efficacy at lower or equal direct costs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9307,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British journal of rheumatology\",\"volume\":\"37 10\",\"pages\":\"1102-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1998-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/rheumatology/37.10.1102\",\"citationCount\":\"74\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British journal of rheumatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/37.10.1102\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/37.10.1102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 74

摘要

目的:评估联合降压泼尼松龙、甲氨蝶呤和磺胺嘧啶早期干预类风湿性关节炎(RA)患者的成本-效果和成本-效用,与单用磺胺嘧啶进行比较。方法:采用多中心56周随机双盲试验,采用评分量表和标准赌博测量技术对直接成本和效用进行全面经济分析。结果:联合治疗组76例,磺胺嘧啶组78例。在前56周的随访中,每位患者联合治疗的平均总费用为5519美元,单独使用磺胺嘧啶治疗的平均总费用为6511美元(P = 0.37)。门诊、住院和非保健各占总费用的三分之一左右。联合治疗组似乎在类风湿性关节炎的住院时间、非协议药物和家庭帮助费用方面有所节省,但比较没有统计学意义。联合治疗组的方案药物和监测费用略高。临床、放射学和功能结果在第28周时显著支持联合治疗(第56周放射学也是如此)。效用得分也有利于联合治疗。结论:以较低或相同的直接费用,联合治疗可提高疗效,具有较高的成本效益。
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 and cost-utility of combination therapy in early rheumatoid arthritis: randomized comparison of combined step-down prednisolone, methotrexate and sulphasalazine with sulphasalazine alone. COBRA Trial Group. Combinatietherapie Bij Reumatoïde Artritis.

Objective: Assessment of the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of early intervention in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, with combined step-down prednisolone, methotrexate and sulphasalazine, compared to sulphasalazine alone.

Methods: Multicentre 56 week randomized double-blind trial with full economic analysis of direct costs and utility analysis with rating scale and standard gamble measurement techniques.

Results: The combined-treatment group included 76 patients and the sulphasalazine group 78 patients. The mean total costs per patient in the first 56 weeks of follow-up were $5519 for combined treatment and $6511 for treatment with sulphasalazine alone (P = 0.37). Out-patient care, in-patient care and non-health care each contributed about one-third to the total costs. The combined-treatment group appeared to generate savings in the length of hospital stay for RA, non-protocol drugs and costs of home help, but comparisons were not statistically significant. Protocol drugs and monitoring were slightly more expensive in the combined-treatment group. Clinical, radiographic and functional outcomes significantly favoured combined treatment at week 28 (radiography also at week 56). Utility scores also favoured combined treatment.

Conclusion: Combined treatment is cost-effective due to enhanced efficacy at lower or equal direct costs.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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