Sobha Sivaprasad, Clare Bailey, Louise Downey, Rose Gilbert, Richard Gale, Ajay Kotagiri, Sajjad Mahmood, Peter Morgan-Warren, Jackie Napier, Nirodhini Narendran, Ian Pearce, Christina Rennie, James Talks, Radek Wojcik, Ravi Jandhyala
{"title":"英国新生血管性视网膜病变诊所的实际服务成本:结构化文献综述和情景分析。","authors":"Sobha Sivaprasad, Clare Bailey, Louise Downey, Rose Gilbert, Richard Gale, Ajay Kotagiri, Sajjad Mahmood, Peter Morgan-Warren, Jackie Napier, Nirodhini Narendran, Ian Pearce, Christina Rennie, James Talks, Radek Wojcik, Ravi Jandhyala","doi":"10.1080/03007995.2024.2362278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Current cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) emphasize drug costs as the differentiator between NICE recommended anti-VEGF treatments but may neglect real-world non-drug costs of running nAMD services in the UK. To address this, this study identified real-world non-drug service cost items relevant to UK NHS nAMD clinics, including costs arising from operational strain (demand exceeding capacity).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cost items were identified by a structured literature review of peer-reviewed and grey literature, and an expert panel of 10 UK-based ophthalmologists with relevance to real-world practice. These items underwent meta-synthesis and were then determined in a consensus exercise.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 237 cost items identified, 217 (91.6%) met the consensus threshold of >0.51 and were included in the nAMD Service Non-Drug Cost Instrument (nAS). Sensitivity of cost items taken from UK Health Technology Assessment (HTA) using the nAS as the reference standard was low (HTAmin: 1.84%, 95% CI 0.50-4.65%; HTAmax: 70.51%, 95% CI 63.96-76.49%). False negative rates showed variable likelihood of misclassifying a service by cost burden depending on prevalence. Scenario analysis using cost magnitudes estimated annual per-patient clinic cost at £845 (within capacity) to £13,960 (under strain) compared to an HTAmin estimate of £210. Accounting for cost of strain under an assumed 50% increase in health resource utilization influenced cost-effectiveness in a hypothetical genericisation scenario.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings suggested that HTA underestimates UK NHS nAMD clinic cost burden with cost of strain contributing substantial additional unmeasured expense with impact on CEA. Given potential undertreatment due to strain, durability is suggested as one of the relevant factors in CEA of nAMD anti-VEGF treatments due to robustness under limited capacity conditions affecting UK ophthalmology services.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Real-world service costs for neovascular-AMD clinics in the United Kingdom: structured literature review and scenario analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Sobha Sivaprasad, Clare Bailey, Louise Downey, Rose Gilbert, Richard Gale, Ajay Kotagiri, Sajjad Mahmood, Peter Morgan-Warren, Jackie Napier, Nirodhini Narendran, Ian Pearce, Christina Rennie, James Talks, Radek Wojcik, Ravi Jandhyala\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03007995.2024.2362278\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Current cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) emphasize drug costs as the differentiator between NICE recommended anti-VEGF treatments but may neglect real-world non-drug costs of running nAMD services in the UK. To address this, this study identified real-world non-drug service cost items relevant to UK NHS nAMD clinics, including costs arising from operational strain (demand exceeding capacity).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cost items were identified by a structured literature review of peer-reviewed and grey literature, and an expert panel of 10 UK-based ophthalmologists with relevance to real-world practice. These items underwent meta-synthesis and were then determined in a consensus exercise.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 237 cost items identified, 217 (91.6%) met the consensus threshold of >0.51 and were included in the nAMD Service Non-Drug Cost Instrument (nAS). Sensitivity of cost items taken from UK Health Technology Assessment (HTA) using the nAS as the reference standard was low (HTAmin: 1.84%, 95% CI 0.50-4.65%; HTAmax: 70.51%, 95% CI 63.96-76.49%). False negative rates showed variable likelihood of misclassifying a service by cost burden depending on prevalence. Scenario analysis using cost magnitudes estimated annual per-patient clinic cost at £845 (within capacity) to £13,960 (under strain) compared to an HTAmin estimate of £210. Accounting for cost of strain under an assumed 50% increase in health resource utilization influenced cost-effectiveness in a hypothetical genericisation scenario.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings suggested that HTA underestimates UK NHS nAMD clinic cost burden with cost of strain contributing substantial additional unmeasured expense with impact on CEA. Given potential undertreatment due to strain, durability is suggested as one of the relevant factors in CEA of nAMD anti-VEGF treatments due to robustness under limited capacity conditions affecting UK ophthalmology services.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2024.2362278\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2024.2362278","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:目前的成本效益分析(CEA)强调药物成本是区分 NICE 推荐的抗血管内皮生长因子治疗方法的标准,但可能忽略了英国 nAMD 服务运行过程中的实际非药物成本。为解决这一问题,本研究确定了与英国国家医疗服务体系 nAMD 诊所相关的现实世界非药物服务成本项目,包括运营压力(需求超过能力)导致的成本:方法:通过对同行评议文献和灰色文献进行结构化文献综述,以及由 10 位英国眼科专家组成的专家小组,确定了与现实世界实践相关的成本项目。这些项目经过元综合,然后在协商一致的基础上确定:结果:在确定的 237 个成本项目中,217 个(91.6%)符合大于 0.51 的共识阈值,并被纳入 nAMD 服务非药物成本工具 (nAS)。以 nAS 为参考标准,从英国卫生技术评估 (HTA) 中提取的成本项目灵敏度较低(HTAmin:1.84%,95% CI 0.50-4.65%;HTAmax:70.51%,95% CI 63.96-76.49%)。假阴性率显示,根据成本负担对服务进行错误分类的可能性因流行程度而异。使用成本幅度进行的情景分析估计,每位患者每年的门诊成本为 845 英镑(能力范围内)至 13960 英镑(紧张状态下),而 HTA 最小估计值为 210 英镑。在假设通用化的情况下,在医疗资源利用率增加 50%的假设条件下,对紧张成本进行核算会影响成本效益:研究结果表明,HTA 低估了英国国家医疗服务体系 nAMD 诊所的成本负担,应变成本造成了大量未计量的额外支出,对 CEA 产生了影响。鉴于应变可能导致治疗不足,因此建议将耐久性作为 nAMD 抗血管内皮生长因子治疗的 CEA 的相关因素之一,因为在英国眼科服务能力有限的条件下,耐久性非常重要。
Real-world service costs for neovascular-AMD clinics in the United Kingdom: structured literature review and scenario analysis.
Objective: Current cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) emphasize drug costs as the differentiator between NICE recommended anti-VEGF treatments but may neglect real-world non-drug costs of running nAMD services in the UK. To address this, this study identified real-world non-drug service cost items relevant to UK NHS nAMD clinics, including costs arising from operational strain (demand exceeding capacity).
Methods: Cost items were identified by a structured literature review of peer-reviewed and grey literature, and an expert panel of 10 UK-based ophthalmologists with relevance to real-world practice. These items underwent meta-synthesis and were then determined in a consensus exercise.
Results: Of 237 cost items identified, 217 (91.6%) met the consensus threshold of >0.51 and were included in the nAMD Service Non-Drug Cost Instrument (nAS). Sensitivity of cost items taken from UK Health Technology Assessment (HTA) using the nAS as the reference standard was low (HTAmin: 1.84%, 95% CI 0.50-4.65%; HTAmax: 70.51%, 95% CI 63.96-76.49%). False negative rates showed variable likelihood of misclassifying a service by cost burden depending on prevalence. Scenario analysis using cost magnitudes estimated annual per-patient clinic cost at £845 (within capacity) to £13,960 (under strain) compared to an HTAmin estimate of £210. Accounting for cost of strain under an assumed 50% increase in health resource utilization influenced cost-effectiveness in a hypothetical genericisation scenario.
Conclusion: Findings suggested that HTA underestimates UK NHS nAMD clinic cost burden with cost of strain contributing substantial additional unmeasured expense with impact on CEA. Given potential undertreatment due to strain, durability is suggested as one of the relevant factors in CEA of nAMD anti-VEGF treatments due to robustness under limited capacity conditions affecting UK ophthalmology services.