Dataset Information

A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of Patient Blood Management.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patient blood management (PBM) is a multidisciplinary concept focused on the management of anaemia, minimisation of iatrogenic blood loss and rational use of allogeneic blood products. The aims of this study were: (i) to analyse post-operative outcome in patients with liberal vs restrictive exposure to allogeneic blood products and (ii) to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PBM in patients undergoing surgery.

Materials and methods

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were performed to compare post-operative complications in predominantly non-transfused patients (restrictive transfusion group) and patients who received one to three units of red blood cells (liberal transfusion group). Outcome measures included sepsis with/without pneumonia, acute renal failure, acute myocardial infarction and acute stroke. In a second step, a health economic model was developed to calculate cost-effectiveness of PBM (PBM-arm vs control-arm) for simulated cohorts of 10,000 cardiac and non-cardiac surgical patients based on the results of the meta-analysis and costs.

Results

Out of 478 search results, 22 studies were analysed in the meta-analysis. The pooled relative risk of any complication in the restrictive transfusion group was 0.43 for non-cardiac and 0.34 for cardiac surgical patients. In the simulation model, PBM was related to reduced complications (1,768 vs 1,245) and complication-related deaths (411 vs 304) compared to standard care. PBM-related costs of therapy exceeded costs of the control arm by € 150 per patient. However, total costs, including hospitalisation, were higher in the control-arm for both non-cardiac (€ 2,885.11) and cardiac surgery patients (€ 1,760.69). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio including hospitalisation showed savings of € 30,458 (non-cardiac and cardiac surgery patients) for preventing one complication and € 128,023 (non-cardiac and cardiac surgery patients) for prevention of one complication-related death in the PBM-arm.

Discussion

Our results indicate that PBM may be associated with fewer adverse clinical outcomes compared to control management and may, thereby, be cost-effective.

SUBMITTER: Kleineruschkamp A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6343592 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of Patient Blood Management.

Kleinerüschkamp Adina A Meybohm Patrick P Straub Niels N Zacharowski Kai K Choorapoikayil Suma S

Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue 20180216 1

<h4>Background</h4>Patient blood management (PBM) is a multidisciplinary concept focused on the management of anaemia, minimisation of iatrogenic blood loss and rational use of allogeneic blood products. The aims of this study were: (i) to analyse post-operative outcome in patients with liberal vs restrictive exposure to allogeneic blood products and (ii) to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PBM in patients undergoing surgery.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>A systematic literature review and meta ...[more]

PMID: 29517965

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Among high-risk patients with hypertension, targeting a systolic blood pressure of 120 mm Hg reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality compared with a higher target. However, intensive blood pressure management incurs additional costs from treatment and from adverse events. Objective:To evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of intensive blood pressure management compared with standard management. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cost-effectiveness analysis conducted from September 2015 to August 2016 used a Markov cohort model to estimate cost-effectiveness of intensive blood pressure management among 68-year-old high-risk adults with hypertension but not diabetes. We used the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) to estimate treatment effects and adverse event rates. We used Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Life Tables to project age- and cause-specific mortality, calibrated to rates reported in SPRINT. We also used population-based observational data to model development of heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, and subsequent mortality. Costs were based on published sources, Medicare data, and the National Inpatient Sample. Interventions:Treatment of hypertension to a systolic blood pressure goal of 120 mm Hg (intensive management) or 140 mm Hg (standard management). Main Outcomes and Measures:Lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), discounted at 3% annually. Results:Standard management yielded 9.6 QALYs and accrued $155?261 in lifetime costs, while intensive management yielded 10.5 QALYs and accrued $176?584 in costs. Intensive blood pressure management cost $23?777 per QALY gained. In a sensitivity analysis, serious adverse events would need to occur at 3 times the rate observed in SPRINT and be 3 times more common in the intensive management arm to prefer standard management. Conclusions and Relevance:Intensive blood pressure management is cost-effective at typical thresholds for value in health care and remains so even with substantially higher adverse event rates.

Project description:BackgroundDiarrhoea is a leading cause of death in Nigerian children under 5 years. Implementing the most cost-effective approach to diarrhoea management in Nigeria will help optimize health care resources allocation. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of various approaches to diarrhoea management namely: the 'no treatment' approach (NT); the preventive approach with rotavirus vaccine; the integrated management of childhood illness for diarrhoea approach (IMCI); and rotavirus vaccine plus integrated management of childhood illness for diarrhoea approach (rotavirus vaccine + IMCI).MethodsMarkov cohort model conducted from the payer's perspective was used to calculate the cost-effectiveness of the four interventions. The markov model simulated a life cycle of 260 weeks for 33 million children under five years at risk of having diarrhoea (well state). Disability adjusted life years (DALYs) averted was used to quantify clinical outcome. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) served as measure of cost-effectiveness.ResultsBased on cost-effectiveness threshold of $2,177.99 (i.e. representing Nigerian GDP/capita), all the approaches were very cost-effective but rotavirus vaccine approach was dominated. While IMCI has the lowest ICER of $4.6/DALY averted, the addition of rotavirus vaccine was cost-effective with an ICER of $80.1/DALY averted. Rotavirus vaccine alone was less efficient in optimizing health care resource allocation.ConclusionRotavirus vaccine + IMCI approach was the most cost-effective approach to childhood diarrhoea management. Its awareness and practice should be promoted in Nigeria. Addition of rotavirus vaccine should be considered for inclusion in the national programme of immunization. Although our findings suggest that addition of rotavirus vaccine to IMCI for diarrhoea is cost-effective, there may be need for further vaccine demonstration studies or real life studies to establish the cost-effectiveness of the vaccine in Nigeria.

Project description:BackgroundA vaccine matched to a newly emerged pandemic influenza virus would require a production time of at least 6 months with current proven techniques, and so could only be used reactively after the peak of the pandemic. A pre-pandemic vaccine, although probably having lower efficacy, could be produced and used pre-emptively. While several previous studies have investigated the cost effectiveness of pre-emptive vaccination strategies, they have not been directly compared to realistic reactive vaccination strategies.MethodsAn individual-based simulation model of ~30,000 people was used to examine a pre-emptive vaccination strategy, assuming vaccination conducted prior to a pandemic using a low-efficacy vaccine. A reactive vaccination strategy, assuming a 6-month delay between pandemic emergence and availability of a high-efficacy vaccine, was also modelled. Social distancing and antiviral interventions were examined in combination with these alternative vaccination strategies. Moderate and severe pandemics were examined, based on estimates of transmissibility and clinical severity of the 1957 and 1918 pandemics respectively, and the cost effectiveness of each strategy was evaluated.ResultsProvided that a pre-pandemic vaccine achieved at least 30% efficacy, pre-emptive vaccination strategies were found to be more cost effective when compared to reactive vaccination strategies. Reactive vaccination coupled with sustained social distancing and antiviral interventions was found to be as effective at saving lives as pre-emptive vaccination coupled with limited duration social distancing and antiviral use, with both strategies saving approximately 420 life-years per 10,000 population for a moderate pandemic with a basic reproduction number of 1.9 and case fatality rate of 0.25%. Reactive vaccination was however more costly due to larger productivity losses incurred by sustained social distancing, costing $8 million per 10,000 population ($19,074/LYS) versus $6.8 million per 10,000 population ($15,897/LYS) for a pre-emptive vaccination strategy. Similar trends were observed for severe pandemics.ConclusionsCompared to reactive vaccination, pre-emptive strategies would be more effective and more cost effective, conditional on the pre-pandemic vaccine being able to achieve a certain level of coverage and efficacy. Reactive vaccination strategies exist which are as effective at mortality reduction as pre-emptive strategies, though they are less cost effective.

Dataset Information

A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of Patient Blood Management.

Background

Materials and methods

Results

Discussion

Publications

A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of Patient Blood Management.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets