Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of CT-Based Finite Element Modeling for Osteoporosis Screening in Secondary Fracture Prevention: An Early Health Technology Assessment in the Netherlands.

IF 1.9 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES MDM Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2023-10-26 eCollection Date: 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1177/23814683231202993
Jieyi Li, Marco Viceconti, Xinshan Li, Pinaki Bhattacharya, David M J Naimark, Anwar Osseyran
{"title":"Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of CT-Based Finite Element Modeling for Osteoporosis Screening in Secondary Fracture Prevention: An Early Health Technology Assessment in the Netherlands.","authors":"Jieyi Li,&nbsp;Marco Viceconti,&nbsp;Xinshan Li,&nbsp;Pinaki Bhattacharya,&nbsp;David M J Naimark,&nbsp;Anwar Osseyran","doi":"10.1177/23814683231202993","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective.</b> To conduct cost-utility analyses for Computed Tomography To Strength (CT2S), a novel osteoporosis screening service, compared with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), treat all without screening, and no screening methods for Dutch postmenopausal women referred to fracture liaison service (FLS). CT2S uses CT scans to generate femur models and simulate sideways fall scenarios for bone strength assessment. <b>Methods.</b> Early health technology assessment (HTA) was adopted to evaluate CT2S as a novel osteoporosis screening tool for secondary fracture prevention. We constructed a 2-dimensional simulation model considering 4 strategies (no screening, treat all without screening, DXA, CT2S) together with screening intervals (5 y, 2 y), treatments (oral alendronate, zoledronic acid), and discount rate scenarios among Dutch women in 3 age groups (60s, 70s, and 80s). Strategy comparisons were based on incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), considering an ICER below €20,000 per QALY gained as cost-effective in the Netherlands. <b>Results.</b> Under the base-case scenario, CT2S versus DXA had estimated ICERs of €41,200 and €14,083 per QALY gained for the 60s and 70s age groups, respectively. For the 80s age group, CT2S was more effective and less costly than DXA. Changing treatment from weekly oral alendronate to annual zoledronic acid substantially decreased CT2S versus DXA ICERs across all age groups. Setting the screening interval to 2 y increased CT2S versus DXA ICERs to €100,333, €55,571, and €15,750 per QALY gained for the 60s, 70s, and 80s age groups, respectively. In all simulated populations and scenarios, CT2S was cost-effective (in some cases dominant) compared with the treat all strategy and cost-saving (more effective and less costly) compared with no screening. <b>Conclusion.</b> CT2S was estimated to be potentially cost-effective in the 70s and 80s age groups considering the willingness-to-pay threshold of the Netherlands. This early HTA suggests CT2S as a potential novel osteoporosis screening tool for secondary fracture prevention.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>For postmenopausal Dutch women who have been referred to the FLS, direct access to CT2S may be cost-effective compared with DXA for age groups 70s and 80s, when considering the ICER threshold of the Netherlands. This study positions CT2S as a potential novel osteoporosis-screening tool for secondary fracture prevention in the clinical setting.A shorter screening interval of 2 y increases the effectiveness of both screening strategies, but the ICER of CT2S compared with DXA also increased substantially, which made CT2S no longer cost-effective for the 70s age group; however, it remains cost-effective for individuals in their 80s.Annual zoledronic acid treatment with better adherence may contribute to a lower cost-effectiveness ratio when comparing CT2S to DXA screening and the treat all strategies for all age groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":36567,"journal":{"name":"MDM Policy and Practice","volume":"8 2","pages":"23814683231202993"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10605708/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MDM Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23814683231202993","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective. To conduct cost-utility analyses for Computed Tomography To Strength (CT2S), a novel osteoporosis screening service, compared with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), treat all without screening, and no screening methods for Dutch postmenopausal women referred to fracture liaison service (FLS). CT2S uses CT scans to generate femur models and simulate sideways fall scenarios for bone strength assessment. Methods. Early health technology assessment (HTA) was adopted to evaluate CT2S as a novel osteoporosis screening tool for secondary fracture prevention. We constructed a 2-dimensional simulation model considering 4 strategies (no screening, treat all without screening, DXA, CT2S) together with screening intervals (5 y, 2 y), treatments (oral alendronate, zoledronic acid), and discount rate scenarios among Dutch women in 3 age groups (60s, 70s, and 80s). Strategy comparisons were based on incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), considering an ICER below €20,000 per QALY gained as cost-effective in the Netherlands. Results. Under the base-case scenario, CT2S versus DXA had estimated ICERs of €41,200 and €14,083 per QALY gained for the 60s and 70s age groups, respectively. For the 80s age group, CT2S was more effective and less costly than DXA. Changing treatment from weekly oral alendronate to annual zoledronic acid substantially decreased CT2S versus DXA ICERs across all age groups. Setting the screening interval to 2 y increased CT2S versus DXA ICERs to €100,333, €55,571, and €15,750 per QALY gained for the 60s, 70s, and 80s age groups, respectively. In all simulated populations and scenarios, CT2S was cost-effective (in some cases dominant) compared with the treat all strategy and cost-saving (more effective and less costly) compared with no screening. Conclusion. CT2S was estimated to be potentially cost-effective in the 70s and 80s age groups considering the willingness-to-pay threshold of the Netherlands. This early HTA suggests CT2S as a potential novel osteoporosis screening tool for secondary fracture prevention.

Highlights: For postmenopausal Dutch women who have been referred to the FLS, direct access to CT2S may be cost-effective compared with DXA for age groups 70s and 80s, when considering the ICER threshold of the Netherlands. This study positions CT2S as a potential novel osteoporosis-screening tool for secondary fracture prevention in the clinical setting.A shorter screening interval of 2 y increases the effectiveness of both screening strategies, but the ICER of CT2S compared with DXA also increased substantially, which made CT2S no longer cost-effective for the 70s age group; however, it remains cost-effective for individuals in their 80s.Annual zoledronic acid treatment with better adherence may contribute to a lower cost-effectiveness ratio when comparing CT2S to DXA screening and the treat all strategies for all age groups.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于CT的有限元模型在二次骨折预防中筛查骨质疏松症的成本效益分析:荷兰的早期健康技术评估。
客观的与双能X射线吸收仪(DXA)相比,对新型骨质疏松症筛查服务——计算机断层扫描强度(CT2S)——进行成本效用分析,针对骨折联络服务(FLS)中的荷兰绝经后妇女,在无筛查和无筛查方法的情况下进行治疗。CT2S使用CT扫描生成股骨模型,并模拟侧面坠落场景,用于骨强度评估。方法。采用早期健康技术评估(HTA)来评估CT2S作为一种新的骨质疏松症筛查工具用于继发性骨折预防。我们构建了一个二维模拟模型,考虑了4种策略(不筛查、全部不筛查治疗、DXA、CT2S)和筛查间隔(5 y、 2 y) ,治疗(口服阿仑膦酸盐、唑来膦酸),以及3个年龄组(60、70和80岁)荷兰妇女的贴现率情景。战略比较基于增量成本效益比(ICER),考虑到荷兰的ICER低于每季度20000欧元是具有成本效益的。后果在基本情况下,CT2S和DXA估计60岁和70岁年龄组的ICER分别为41200欧元和14083欧元。对于80岁年龄组,CT2S比DXA更有效,成本更低。将治疗从每周口服阿仑膦酸盐改为每年口服唑来膦酸盐,显著降低了所有年龄组的CT2S和DXA ICER。将筛选间隔设置为2 y将60、70和80岁年龄组的CT2S和DXA ICER分别提高到100333欧元、55571欧元和15750欧元。在所有模拟人群和场景中,与全治疗策略相比,CT2S具有成本效益(在某些情况下占主导地位),与不进行筛查相比,成本节约(更有效、成本更低)。结论考虑到荷兰的支付意愿阈值,估计CT2S在70年代和80年代的年龄组中具有潜在的成本效益。这种早期的HTA表明CT2S是一种潜在的新型骨质疏松症筛查工具,可用于二次骨折预防。亮点:对于已转诊至FLS的绝经后荷兰妇女,考虑到荷兰的ICER阈值,与70岁和80岁年龄组的DXA相比,直接使用CT2S可能具有成本效益。本研究将CT2S定位为一种潜在的新型骨质疏松症筛查工具,用于临床二次骨折预防。2 y的较短筛查间隔增加了两种筛查策略的有效性,但与DXA相比,CT2S的ICER也大幅增加,这使得CT2S对70岁年龄组不再具有成本效益;然而,对于80多岁的人来说,它仍然具有成本效益。当比较CT2S和DXA筛查以及所有年龄组的所有治疗策略时,具有更好依从性的唑来膦酸年度治疗可能有助于降低成本效益比。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
MDM Policy and Practice
MDM Policy and Practice Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Prioritizing Patients from the Most Deprived Areas on Elective Waiting Lists in the NHS in England: Estimating the Health and Health Inequality Impact. Optimizing Masks and Random Screening Test Usage within K-12 Schools. Associations of Concordant and Shared Lung Cancer Screening Decision Making with Decisional Conflict: A Multi-Institution Cross-Sectional Analysis. Implications of Diminishing Lifespan Marginal Utility for Valuing Equity in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Evaluation of the Soda Tax on Obesity and Diabetes in California: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1