Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2025
Optimizing Evaluation of Gastroesophageal Reflux With Atypical Symptoms: Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Minimalization Analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shah Eric D, Yadlapati Rena, Chan Walter W, Gyawali C Prakash
Аннотация
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Many patients with laryngopharyngeal symptoms (LPS), chronic cough, or belching are referred to gastroenterologists for evaluation and management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). We aimed to optimize a cost-effective approach to evaluating atypical GERD symptoms.
METHODS: We developed a decision analytic model comparing common strategies: (1) usual care defined by empiric proton pump inhibitors and endoscopy, or (2) comprehensive 1-time diagnostics including endoscopy and ambulatory reflux testing to guide therapy. The model was applied to patients with LPS, belching, and chronic cough from patient and insurer perspectives. The time horizon was 1 year, and the willingness-to-pay threshold was set to $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.
RESULTS: For patients with LPS, upfront testing, including pH/impedance monitoring and wireless pH monitoring, optimized cost-effectiveness by identifying patients who can convincingly stop proton pump inhibitor therapy ($220-$301 saved to patients, ∼$3300 saved to insurers, +0.01 QALY gained/year). For patients with belching, upfront testing, including pH/impedance monitoring, optimized cost-effectiveness by identifying patients with supragastric belching who would benefit from diaphragmatic breathing ($3424 saved to patients, $5847 saved to insurers, +0.10 QALY gained/year). For patients with cough-predominant LPS, demonstration that GERD is absent with comprehensive testing appears cost-effective from an insurers' perspective, but not necessarily from patients' perspective, and the decision can be left to the patients and providers.
CONCLUSIONS: Phenotyping the approach to the dominant symptom may optimize evaluating patients with atypical GERD symptoms. These conclusions are consistent with the Lyon 2.0 and San Diego consensus recommendations of treatment avenues distinct from GERD management.
METHODS: We developed a decision analytic model comparing common strategies: (1) usual care defined by empiric proton pump inhibitors and endoscopy, or (2) comprehensive 1-time diagnostics including endoscopy and ambulatory reflux testing to guide therapy. The model was applied to patients with LPS, belching, and chronic cough from patient and insurer perspectives. The time horizon was 1 year, and the willingness-to-pay threshold was set to $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.
RESULTS: For patients with LPS, upfront testing, including pH/impedance monitoring and wireless pH monitoring, optimized cost-effectiveness by identifying patients who can convincingly stop proton pump inhibitor therapy ($220-$301 saved to patients, ∼$3300 saved to insurers, +0.01 QALY gained/year). For patients with belching, upfront testing, including pH/impedance monitoring, optimized cost-effectiveness by identifying patients with supragastric belching who would benefit from diaphragmatic breathing ($3424 saved to patients, $5847 saved to insurers, +0.10 QALY gained/year). For patients with cough-predominant LPS, demonstration that GERD is absent with comprehensive testing appears cost-effective from an insurers' perspective, but not necessarily from patients' perspective, and the decision can be left to the patients and providers.
CONCLUSIONS: Phenotyping the approach to the dominant symptom may optimize evaluating patients with atypical GERD symptoms. These conclusions are consistent with the Lyon 2.0 and San Diego consensus recommendations of treatment avenues distinct from GERD management.