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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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