Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of Out-of-Hospital Continuous Positive Airway Pressure for Acute Respiratory Failure.

ABSTRACT:

Study objective

We determine the cost-effectiveness of out-of-hospital continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) compared with standard care for adults presenting to emergency medical services with acute respiratory failure.

Methods

We developed an economic model using a United Kingdom health care system perspective to compare the costs and health outcomes of out-of-hospital CPAP to standard care (inhospital noninvasive ventilation) when applied to a hypothetical cohort of patients with acute respiratory failure. The model assigned each patient a probability of intubation or death, depending on the patient's characteristics and whether he or she had out-of-hospital CPAP or standard care. The patients who survived accrued lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and health care costs according to their age and sex. Costs were accrued through intervention and hospital treatment costs, which depended on patient outcomes. All results were converted into US dollars, using the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development purchasing power parities rates.

Results

Out-of-hospital CPAP was more effective than standard care but was also more expensive, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £20,514 per QALY ($29,720/QALY) and a 49.5% probability of being cost-effective at the £20,000 per QALY ($29,000/QALY) threshold. The probability of out-of-hospital CPAP's being cost-effective at the £20,000 per QALY ($29,000/QALY) threshold depended on the incidence of eligible patients and varied from 35.4% when a low estimate of incidence was used to 93.8% with a high estimate. Variation in the incidence of eligible patients also had a marked influence on the expected value of sample information for a future randomized trial.

Conclusion

The cost-effectiveness of out-of-hospital CPAP is uncertain. The incidence of patients eligible for out-of-hospital CPAP appears to be the key determinant of cost-effectiveness.

SUBMITTER: Thokala P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4414542 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStandard prehospital management for Acute respiratory failure (ARF) involves controlled oxygen therapy. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is a potentially beneficial alternative treatment, however, it is uncertain whether this could improve outcomes and provide value for money. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of prehospital CPAP in ARF.MethodsA cost-utility economic evaluation was performed using a probabilistic decision tree model synthesising available evidence. The model consisted of a hypothetical cohort of patients in a representative ambulance service with undifferentiated ARF, receiving standard oxygen therapy or prehospital CPAP. Costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated using methods recommended by NICE.ResultsIn the base case analysis, using CPAP effectiveness estimates form the ACUTE trial, the mean expected costs of standard care and prehospital CPAP were £15,201 and £14,850 respectively and the corresponding mean expected QALYs were 1.190 and 1.128, respectively. The mean ICER estimated as standard oxygen therapy compared to prehospital CPAP was £5685 per QALY which indicated that standard oxygen therapy strategy was likely to be cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY (67% probability). The scenario analysis, using effectiveness estimates from an updated meta-analysis, suggested that prehospital CPAP was more effective (mean incremental QALYs of 0.157), but also more expensive (mean incremental costs of £1522), than standard care. The mean ICER, estimated as prehospital CPAP compared to standard care, was £9712 per QALY. At the £20,000 per QALY prehospital CPAP was highly likely to be the most cost-effective strategy (94%).ConclusionsCost-effectiveness of prehospital CPAP depends upon the estimate of effectiveness. When based on a small pragmatic feasibility trial, standard oxygen therapy is cost-effective. When based on meta-analysis of heterogeneous trials, CPAP is cost-effective. Value of information analyses support commissioning of a large pragmatic effectiveness trial, providing feasibility and plausibility conditions are met.

Project description:Rationale: The respective effects of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and pressure support delivered through the helmet interface in patients with hypoxemia need to be better understood. Objectives: To assess the respective effects of helmet pressure support (noninvasive ventilation [NIV]) and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) compared with high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) on effort to breathe, lung inflation, and gas exchange in patients with hypoxemia (PaO2/FiO2 ⩽ 200). Methods: Fifteen patients underwent 1-hour phases (constant FiO2) of HFNO (60 L/min), helmet NIV (PEEP = 14 cm H2O, pressure support = 12 cm H2O), and CPAP (PEEP = 14 cm H2O) in randomized sequence. Measurements and Main Results: Inspiratory esophageal (ΔPES) and transpulmonary pressure (ΔPL) swings were used as surrogates for inspiratory effort and lung distension, respectively. Tidal Volume (Vt) and end-expiratory lung volume were assessed with electrical impedance tomography. ΔPES was lower during NIV versus CPAP and HFNO (median [interquartile range], 5 [3-9] cm H2O vs. 13 [10-19] cm H2O vs. 10 [8-13] cm H2O; P = 0.001 and P = 0.01). ΔPL was not statistically different between treatments. PaO2/FiO2 ratio was significantly higher during NIV and CPAP versus HFNO (166 [136-215] and 175 [158-281] vs. 120 [107-149]; P = 0.002 and P = 0.001). NIV and CPAP similarly increased Vt versus HFNO (mean change, 70% [95% confidence interval (CI), 17-122%], P = 0.02; 93% [95% CI, 30-155%], P = 0.002) and end-expiratory lung volume (mean change, 198% [95% CI, 67-330%], P = 0.001; 263% [95% CI, 121-407%], P = 0.001), mostly due to increased aeration/ventilation in dorsal lung regions. During HFNO, 14 of 15 patients had pendelluft involving >10% of Vt; pendelluft was mitigated by CPAP and further by NIV. Conclusions: Compared with HFNO, helmet NIV, but not CPAP, reduced ΔPES. CPAP and NIV similarly increased oxygenation, end-expiratory lung volume, and Vt, without affecting ΔPL. NIV, and to a lesser extent CPAP, mitigated pendelluft. Clinical trial registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04241861).

Project description:ObjectivesContinuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) may be a useful treatment strategy for patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia but its effectiveness in preventing mechanical ventilation is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of COVID-19 patients treated with CPAP and determine predictors of CPAP response.DesignThis was a retrospective observational cohort study.SettingThe study took place in the intensive care unit (ICU) at Royal Papworth Hospital (RPH) in Cambridge, UK.PatientsWe included all consecutive patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia who were transferred from neighbouring hospitals between 14th March and 6th May, 2020 for consideration of ventilatory support.InterventionWe instituted the use of CPAP for all patients who arrived in RPH not intubated and were not making satisfactory progress on supplemental oxygen alone.Measurements and main resultsOf 33 self-ventilating patients included in this study, 22 (66.7%) were male and the mean age was 54 ± 13.23 patients received CPAP. They were more hypoxaemic than those treated with oxygen alone (PaO2/FiO2 ratio; 84.3 ± 19.0 vs 170.0 ± 46.0 mmHg, p = 0.001). There was a significant improvement in PaO2/FiO2 ratio 1-2 hours after CPAP initiation (167.4 ± 49.0 from 84.3 ± 19.0 mmHg, p = 0.001). 14 (61%) patients responded to CPAP and 9 required intubation. There was no difference between these two groups in terms of the severity of baseline hypoxaemia (PaO2/FiO2 ratio; 84.5 ± 16.0 vs 83.9 ± 23.0 mmHg, p = 0.94) but CPAP responders had significantly lower C-reactive protein (CRP) (176 ± 83 vs 274 ± 63 mg/L, p = 0.007), interleukin-6 (IL-6) (30 ± 47 vs 139 ± 148 pg/mL, p = 0.037), and D-dimer (321 ± 267 vs 941 + 1990 ng/mL, p = 0.003). CT pulmonary angiogram was performed in 6 out of 9 intubated patients and demonstrated pulmonary emboli in 5 of them. All patients were discharged from ICU and there were no fatalities.ConclusionsIn this cohort, CPAP was an effective treatment modality to improve hypoxaemia and prevent invasive ventilation in a substantial proportion of patients with severe respiratory failure. Accepting the small sample size, we also found raised biomarkers of inflammation (CRP and IL-6) and coagulopathy (D-Dimer) to be more useful predictors of CPAP responsiveness than the severity of hypoxaemia, and could help to guide intubation decisions in this clinical setting.