Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Cost-effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the treatment of mild obstructive sleep apnea: an exploratory analysis.
Liu, Shan; Cao, Khoa N; Garner, Abigail M; Punjabi, Naresh M; Pietzsch, Jan B.
Afiliação
  • Liu S; Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
  • Cao KN; Wing Tech Inc., Menlo Park, CA, USA.
  • Garner AM; Wing Tech Inc., Menlo Park, CA, USA.
  • Punjabi NM; Wing Tech Inc., Menlo Park, CA, USA.
  • Pietzsch JB; Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA.
Int J Technol Assess Health Care ; 39(1): e32, 2023 Jun 06.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37277322
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

To assess the potential cost-effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) for treatment of mild obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).

METHODS:

A decision-analytic Markov model was developed to estimate health state progression, incremental cost, and quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gain of NMES compared to no treatment, continuous airway pressure (CPAP), or oral appliance (OA) treatment. The base case assumed no cardiovascular (CV) benefit for any of the interventions, while potential CV benefit was considered in scenario analyses. Therapy effectiveness was based on a recent multi-center trial for NMES, and on the TOMADO and MERGE studies for OA and CPAP. Costs, considered from a United States payer perspective, were projected over lifetime for a 48-year-old cohort, 68% of whom were male. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) threshold of USD150,000 per QALY gained was applied.

RESULTS:

From a baseline AHI of 10.2 events/hour, NMES, OA and CPAP reduced the AHI to 6.9, 7.0 and 1.4 events/hour respectively. Long-term therapy adherence was estimated at 65-75% for NMES and 55% for both OA and CPAP. Compared to no treatment, NMES added between 0.268 and 0.536 QALYs and between USD7,481 and USD17,445 in cost, resulting in ICERs between USD15,436 and USD57,844 per QALY gained. Depending on long-term adherence assumptions, either NMES or CPAP were found to be the preferred treatment option, with NMES becoming more attractive with younger age and assuming CPAP was not used for the full night in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS:

NMES might be a cost-effective treatment option for patients with mild OSA.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono / Pressão Positiva Contínua nas Vias Aéreas Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Health_economic_evaluation / Prognostic_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Int J Technol Assess Health Care Assunto da revista: PESQUISA EM SERVICOS DE SAUDE Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono / Pressão Positiva Contínua nas Vias Aéreas Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Health_economic_evaluation / Prognostic_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Int J Technol Assess Health Care Assunto da revista: PESQUISA EM SERVICOS DE SAUDE Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos