Cost-effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-related respiratory failure in Indian hospitals without ICU facilities.

INTRODUCTION: The majority of Indian hospitals do not provide intensive care unit (ICU) care or ward-based noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIV). Because no mechanical ventilation or NIV is available in these hospitals, the majority of patients suffering from respiratory failure die. OBJECTIVE: To perform a cost-effective analysis of two strategies (ward-based NIV with concurrent standard treatment vs standard treatment alone) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) respiratory failure patients treated in Indian hospitals without ICU care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision-analytical model was created to compare the cost-effectiveness for the two strategies. Estimates from the literature were used for parameters in the model. Future costs were discounted at 3%. All costs were reported in USD (2012). One-way, two-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed. The time horizon was lifetime and perspective was societal. RESULTS: The NIV strategy resulted in 17.7% more survival and was slightly more costly (increased cost of $101 (USD 2012) but resulted in increased quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (1.67 QALY). The cost-effectiveness (2012 USD)/QALY in the standard and NIV groups was $78/QALY ($535.02/6.82) and $75/QALY ($636.33/8.49), respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was only $61 USD/QALY. This was substantially lower than the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita for India (1489 USD), suggesting the NIV strategy was very cost effective. Using a 5% discount rate resulted in only minimally different results. Probabilistic analysis suggests that NIV strategy was preferred 100% of the time when willingness to pay was >$250 2012 USD. CONCLUSION: Ward-based NIV treatment is cost-effective in India, and may increase survival of patients with COPD respiratory failure when ICU is not available.