RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Because the unit cost of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) is higher than traditional ground-based emergency medical services (EMS), it is important to further investigate the impact of HEMS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of physician-staffed HEMS compared with ground-based EMS in Finland under current practices. METHODS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was evaluated using the differences in outcomes and costs between HEMS and ground-based EMS. The estimated mortality within 30 days and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to measure health benefits. Quality of life was estimated according to the EuroQoL scale, and a 1-way sensitivity analysis was conducted on the QALY indexes ranging from 0.6 to 0.8. Survival rates were calculated according to the national HEMS database, and the cost structure was estimated at 48 million euros based on financial statements. RESULTS: HEMS prevented the 30-day mortality of 68.1 patients annually, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 43,688 to 56,918/QALY. Fixed costs accounted for 93% of HEMS expenses because of 24/7 operations, making the capacity utilization rate a major determinant of total costs. CONCLUSION: HEMS intervention is cost-effective compared with ground-based EMS and is acceptable from a societal willingness-to-pay perspective. These findings contribute valuable insights for health care management decision making and highlight the need for future research for service optimization.
Asunto(s)
Ambulancias Aéreas , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Finlandia , Humanos , Ambulancias Aéreas/economía , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia/economía , Médicos/economía , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Since Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) is an expensive resource in terms of unit price compared to ground-based Emergency Medical Service (EMS), it is important to further investigate which methods would allow for the optimization of these services. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of physician-staffed HEMS compared to ground-based EMS in developed scenarios with improvements in triage, aviation performance, and the inclusion of ischemic stroke patients. METHODS: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was assessed by comparing health outcomes and costs of HEMS versus ground-based EMS across six different scenarios. Estimated 30-day mortality and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to measure health benefits. Quality-of-Life (QoL) was assessed with EuroQoL instrument, and a one-way sensitivity analysis was carried out across different patient groups. Survival estimates were evaluated from the national FinnHEMS database, with cost analysis based on the most recent financial reports. RESULTS: The best outcome was achieved in Scenario 3.1 which included a reduction in over-alerts, aviation performance enhancement, and assessment of ischemic stroke patients. This scenario yielded 1077.07-1436.09 additional QALYs with an ICER of 33,703-44,937 /QALY. This represented a 27.72% increase in the additional QALYs and a 21.05% reduction in the ICER compared to the current practice. CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effectiveness of HEMS can be highly improved by adding stroke patients into the dispatch criteria, as the overall costs are fixed, and the cost-effectiveness is determined based on the utilization rate of capacity.