Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byNora McGee Modified over 8 years ago
1
{ Challenges in cost-utility analysis in the critical care setting Ville Pettilä MD, PhD, A/P Helsinki University Hospital 23.9.2011 1 VP SFAI- veckan / Kalmar
2
CCM 2006
3
- only 19 papers - max $958,423/ QALY -$1,150 - $575,000 / life-year - many < $50,000 /QALY -
4
41 studies in critical/intensive care quality assessed as poor to moderate
5
Boston- CEA Registry- Quality of cost-utility analyses
6
{.. In the ideal world 23.9.2011 6 VP
7
Sintonen 1994
8
{
9
23.9.2011VP 9
10
Angus D AMJRCCM 2001 ARDS N=200
11
Angus DC et al. CCM 2006 Quality-adjusted survival
12
{ Challenge No 1: Inter-patient variability
13
Costs and QALYs – the real world in the ICU
14
Räsänen P et al. HQLO 2006 Cost-effectiveness planes for a treatment
15
Crit Care Med 2003
16
{ Challenge No 2: Inter-diagnoses variability
18
{ Challenge No 3: How to adjust for non-survivors?
19
Angus D et al. CCM 2006
20
{ Challenge No 4: Which instrument to use for quality of life (QOL)?
21
{ (1) What is an OPTIMAL QOL measure ? SF- (RAND- 36) EQ-5D Nottingham Health Profile (NPH) SIP etc.
22
{ EQ-5D *simple *ESICM recommendation *one number between 0 and 1 * enables QALY calculations
23
{ (2) QOL – target population ? selected vs. unselected defined vs. all trauma ?, sepsis? ARDS? timing of measurement 6(-12) months post/ICU ? a cohort or an RCT?
24
{ (3) QOL- missing data Proportion of missing data - < 10%? How to handle missing data ? Comparison of patients with missing data to those with available data ! Adequate sample size !
25
{ (4) QOL- follow-up and adjustment ? Were all patients followed ? What is the optimal time for QOL measurement ?
27
Dowdy et al ICM 2006
28
- 8894 references - 111 studies -21 different patient populations -21 studies included -Different instruments, patient populations Dowdy et al. ICM 2005
30
23.9.2011VP 30
31
{ Challenge No 5: How to calculate/ estimate quality of life (QOL)?
32
{ Challenge No 6: How accurate are the costs? Indirect costs ? Costs after hospital discharge?
33
{ Challenge No 7: What is the time-frame? Should it be life-time?
34
Kaarlola A, Tallgren M, Pettilä V CCM 2006
35
QALYs after critical care [N=2873] Kaarlola et al. CCM 2006
36
Cost-utility after intensive care [N=2873] Kaarlola et al. CCM 2006
37
{ Cost per QALY in severe sepsis (Finnsepsis study) N=480 Karlsson et al CCM 2009 Key finding: The estimated life-time cost-utility using QOL at 2 years after discharge is very reasonable (median 1720€/QALY)
38
Mean of costs, costs/QALYs and estimated QALYs with 95% CIs in different age groups for acute respiratory failure patients. FINNALI, Linko et al. Critical Care 2010 Cost per QALY in acute respiratory failure (FINNALI study) N=958 23.9.2011 38 VP
39
Table 3. Predicted cost-utilities in subgroups of patients with acute respiratory failure. n Gained survival (yrs)QALYs (yrs) Cost/hospital survivor Cost/QALY mean (SD) € € Age (yrs) ≤5125236 (19)25 (16)19195 670 52-6323617 (11)11 (8)21069 1582 64-742519 (8)6 (6)21499 2620 ≥752194 (5)3 (3)21737 5263 SAPS II (points) ≤3125328 (18)20 (15)15187 726 32-4324618 (16)11 (12)22545 1656 44-5522213 (15)8 (11)23565 2026 ≥562378 (13)5 (9)24760 2560 Admission type Elective13316 (14)12 (12)17273 1283 Emergency82117 (18)11 (13)21462 1410 Ventilatory support NIV only10515 (17)11 (14)13154 956 Invasive ventilation only 77517 (17)12 (13)20065 1313 NIV and invasive ventilation before 6 hours4311 (16)6 (9)42625 3733 NIV and invasive ventilation after 6 hours3513 (17)8 (11)44971 3499 ARF risk factors 48 hours before Sepsis13614 (15)9 (12)37219 2599 Cardiac insufficiency1929 (12)6 (8)27322 2779 Pneumonia11414 (16)9 (12)26368 2106 Post-operative with ventilatory support<1 day13217 (15)12 (12)11025 836 Chronic diseases: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic restrictive pulmonary disease, chronic heart disease, diabetes mellitus, immunodeficiency, neuromuscular disease Linko et al. Critical Care 2010 accepted Cost-utility – acute respiratory failure – life-time scale –FINNALI -2007 Linko et al Critical Care 2010 23.9.2011 39 VP
40
{ Challenge No 8: Discount for costs and QALYs included in the calculations?
41
{ Challenge No 9 How to present willingness to pay and probabilities?
42
{ Challenge No 9: How to present willingness to pay and probabilities? CEAC- cost effectiveness acceptability curve
43
Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves-CEACs Subgroups of patients according to gained QALYs
44
23.9.2011VP 44
45
23.9.2011VP 45
46
Cost utility studies in critical care lack scientific validity and robustness Conclusions 23.9.2011VP 46
47
Cost utility studies in critical care lack scientific validity and robustness No consensus regarding utility instrument, calculations, adjustment for missing data, and representation of data exist Conclusions 23.9.2011VP 47
48
Cost utility studies in critical care lack scientific validity and robustness No consensus regarding utility instrument, calculations, adjustment for missing data, and representation of data exists At their best the available cost utility studies in critical care may be seen as clinically valuable estimations of benefit/ harm of the treatment Conclusions 23.9.2011VP 48
49
Conclusion Cost-utility –studies…. …..the gold standard 1. Representative non-selected population 2. Defined diagnostic group 3. Standardized utility instrument 4. Life-time scale for QALYs gained 5. Preferably all hospital costs/reliable estimate 6. Discount rate 7. Sensitivity analysis regarding different age and severity of disease 8. Cost-effectivenss plane 9. CEA-curve 23.9.2011 49 VP
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.