Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Assunto da revista
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
NPJ Aging ; 10(1): 13, 2024 Feb 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38331952

RESUMO

Medical and long-term care for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRDs) can impose a large economic burden on individuals and societies. We estimated the per capita cost of ADRDs care in the in the United States in 2016 and projected future aggregate care costs during 2020-2060. Based on a previously published methodology, we used U.S. Health and Retirement Survey (2010-2016) longitudinal data to estimate formal and informal care costs. In 2016, the estimated per patient cost of formal care was $28,078 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $25,893-$30,433), and informal care cost valued in terms of replacement cost and forgone wages was $36,667 ($34,025-$39,473) and $15,792 ($12,980-$18,713), respectively. Aggregate formal care cost and formal plus informal care cost using replacement cost and forgone wage methods were $196 billion (95% uncertainty range [UR]: $179-$213 billion), $450 billion ($424-$478 billion), and $305 billion ($278-$333 billion), respectively, in 2020. These were projected to increase to $1.4 trillion ($837 billion-$2.2 trillion), $3.3 trillion ($1.9-$5.1 trillion), and $2.2 trillion ($1.3-$3.5 trillion), respectively, in 2060.

2.
J Med Econ ; 25(1): 1051-1060, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35983718

RESUMO

AIMS: We evaluated the availability of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to determine its value across all severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (SSAS) patients, especially those untreated because of concerns regarding invasive surgical AVR (SAVR) and its impact on active aging. METHODS: We performed payer perspective cost-utility analysis (CUA) and societal perspective cost-benefit analysis (CBA). The CBA's benefit measure is active time: salaried labor, unpaid work, and active leisure. The study population is a cohort of US elderly SSAS patients. We compared a "TAVR available" scenario in which SSAS patients distribute themselves across TAVR, SAVR, and medical management (MM); and a "TAVR not available" scenario with only SAVR and MM. We structured each scenario with a decision-tree model of SSAS patient treatment allocation. We measured the association between health and active time in the US Health and Retirement Study and used this association to impute active time to SSAS patients given their health. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and rate of return (RoR) of TAVR availability were $8,533 and 395%, respectively. CUA net monetary benefits (NMB) were $212,199 per patient and $43.4 billion population-wide. CBA NMB were $50,530 per patient and $10.3 billion population-wide. LIMITATIONS: Among study limitations were scarcity of evidence regarding key parameters and the lack of long-term survival, health utility, and treatment cost data. Our analysis did not account for TAVR durability, retreatments, and valve-in-valve treatments. CONCLUSION: Across risk-, age-, and treatment-eligibility groups, TAVR is the economically optimal treatment choice. It represents strong value-for-money per patient and population-wide. The vast majority of TAVR value involves raising treatment uptake among the untreated.


Aortic stenosis (AS) is a common and lethal heart disease. Surgical treatment has long been available, but its invasiveness limits uptake. More recently, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a treatment alternative. Its minimal invasiveness has significantly increased treatment rates, but economic evaluations omit this benefit, risking undervaluation. We evaluated TAVR in elderly US severe symptomatic AS patients, using payer perspective cost-utility analysis (CUA) and societal perspective cost-benefit analysis (CBA). Both CUA and CBA incorporated TAVR's impact on treatment rates. Given patient preferences for treatment options promoting active aging, our CBA used the value of active time as a benefit measure. We found that CUA/CBA net monetary benefits are $212,199/$50,530 per patient. Across risk-, age-, and treatment-eligibility groups, TAVR is the economically optimal treatment choice over surgery and medical management. It represents strong value-for-money per patient and population-wide. Increased treatment uptake accounts for the vast share of TAVR's value.


Assuntos
Estenose da Valva Aórtica , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Idoso , Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde , Humanos , Fatores de Risco , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA