Cargando…
Cost‐effectiveness analysis of antiviral treatment in the management of seasonal influenza A: point‐of‐care rapid test versus clinical judgment
BACKGROUND: A point‐of‐care rapid test (POCRT) may help early and targeted use of antiviral drugs for the management of influenza A infection. OBJECTIVE: (i) To determine whether antiviral treatment based on a POCRT for influenza A is cost‐effective and, (ii) to determine the thresholds of key test...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4746566/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26574910 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/irv.12359 |
_version_ | 1782414829629210624 |
---|---|
author | Nshimyumukiza, Léon Douville, Xavier Fournier, Diane Duplantie, Julie Daher, Rana K. Charlebois, Isabelle Longtin, Jean Papenburg, Jesse Guay, Maryse Boissinot, Maurice Bergeron, Michel G. Boudreau, Denis Gagné, Christian Rousseau, François Reinharz, Daniel |
author_facet | Nshimyumukiza, Léon Douville, Xavier Fournier, Diane Duplantie, Julie Daher, Rana K. Charlebois, Isabelle Longtin, Jean Papenburg, Jesse Guay, Maryse Boissinot, Maurice Bergeron, Michel G. Boudreau, Denis Gagné, Christian Rousseau, François Reinharz, Daniel |
author_sort | Nshimyumukiza, Léon |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A point‐of‐care rapid test (POCRT) may help early and targeted use of antiviral drugs for the management of influenza A infection. OBJECTIVE: (i) To determine whether antiviral treatment based on a POCRT for influenza A is cost‐effective and, (ii) to determine the thresholds of key test parameters (sensitivity, specificity and cost) at which a POCRT based‐strategy appears to be cost effective. METHODS: An hybrid « susceptible, infected, recovered (SIR) » compartmental transmission and Markov decision analytic model was used to simulate the cost‐effectiveness of antiviral treatment based on a POCRT for influenza A in the social perspective. Data input parameters used were retrieved from peer‐review published studies and government databases. The outcome considered was the incremental cost per life‐year saved for one seasonal influenza season. RESULTS: In the base‐case analysis, the antiviral treatment based on POCRT saves 2 lives/100 000 person‐years and costs $7600 less than the empirical antiviral treatment based on clinical judgment alone, which demonstrates that the POCRT‐based strategy is dominant. In one and two way‐sensitivity analyses, results were sensitive to the POCRT accuracy and cost, to the vaccination coverage as well as to the prevalence of influenza A. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the POCRT strategy is cost‐effective in 66% of cases, for a commonly accepted threshold of $50 000 per life‐year saved. CONCLUSION: The influenza antiviral treatment based on POCRT could be cost‐effective in specific conditions of performance, price and disease prevalence. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4746566 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47465662016-03-01 Cost‐effectiveness analysis of antiviral treatment in the management of seasonal influenza A: point‐of‐care rapid test versus clinical judgment Nshimyumukiza, Léon Douville, Xavier Fournier, Diane Duplantie, Julie Daher, Rana K. Charlebois, Isabelle Longtin, Jean Papenburg, Jesse Guay, Maryse Boissinot, Maurice Bergeron, Michel G. Boudreau, Denis Gagné, Christian Rousseau, François Reinharz, Daniel Influenza Other Respir Viruses Original Article BACKGROUND: A point‐of‐care rapid test (POCRT) may help early and targeted use of antiviral drugs for the management of influenza A infection. OBJECTIVE: (i) To determine whether antiviral treatment based on a POCRT for influenza A is cost‐effective and, (ii) to determine the thresholds of key test parameters (sensitivity, specificity and cost) at which a POCRT based‐strategy appears to be cost effective. METHODS: An hybrid « susceptible, infected, recovered (SIR) » compartmental transmission and Markov decision analytic model was used to simulate the cost‐effectiveness of antiviral treatment based on a POCRT for influenza A in the social perspective. Data input parameters used were retrieved from peer‐review published studies and government databases. The outcome considered was the incremental cost per life‐year saved for one seasonal influenza season. RESULTS: In the base‐case analysis, the antiviral treatment based on POCRT saves 2 lives/100 000 person‐years and costs $7600 less than the empirical antiviral treatment based on clinical judgment alone, which demonstrates that the POCRT‐based strategy is dominant. In one and two way‐sensitivity analyses, results were sensitive to the POCRT accuracy and cost, to the vaccination coverage as well as to the prevalence of influenza A. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the POCRT strategy is cost‐effective in 66% of cases, for a commonly accepted threshold of $50 000 per life‐year saved. CONCLUSION: The influenza antiviral treatment based on POCRT could be cost‐effective in specific conditions of performance, price and disease prevalence. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-01-29 2016-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4746566/ /pubmed/26574910 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/irv.12359 Text en © 2015 The Authors. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Nshimyumukiza, Léon Douville, Xavier Fournier, Diane Duplantie, Julie Daher, Rana K. Charlebois, Isabelle Longtin, Jean Papenburg, Jesse Guay, Maryse Boissinot, Maurice Bergeron, Michel G. Boudreau, Denis Gagné, Christian Rousseau, François Reinharz, Daniel Cost‐effectiveness analysis of antiviral treatment in the management of seasonal influenza A: point‐of‐care rapid test versus clinical judgment |
title | Cost‐effectiveness analysis of antiviral treatment in the management of seasonal influenza A: point‐of‐care rapid test versus clinical judgment |
title_full | Cost‐effectiveness analysis of antiviral treatment in the management of seasonal influenza A: point‐of‐care rapid test versus clinical judgment |
title_fullStr | Cost‐effectiveness analysis of antiviral treatment in the management of seasonal influenza A: point‐of‐care rapid test versus clinical judgment |
title_full_unstemmed | Cost‐effectiveness analysis of antiviral treatment in the management of seasonal influenza A: point‐of‐care rapid test versus clinical judgment |
title_short | Cost‐effectiveness analysis of antiviral treatment in the management of seasonal influenza A: point‐of‐care rapid test versus clinical judgment |
title_sort | cost‐effectiveness analysis of antiviral treatment in the management of seasonal influenza a: point‐of‐care rapid test versus clinical judgment |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4746566/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26574910 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/irv.12359 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nshimyumukizaleon costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT douvillexavier costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT fournierdiane costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT duplantiejulie costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT daherranak costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT charleboisisabelle costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT longtinjean costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT papenburgjesse costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT guaymaryse costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT boissinotmaurice costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT bergeronmichelg costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT boudreaudenis costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT gagnechristian costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT rousseaufrancois costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment AT reinharzdaniel costeffectivenessanalysisofantiviraltreatmentinthemanagementofseasonalinfluenzaapointofcarerapidtestversusclinicaljudgment |