Journal of medical economics · 2013
Cost-effectiveness of distributing naloxone to heroin users for lay overdose reversal in Russian cities.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Coffin Phillip O, Sullivan Sean D
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of distributing naloxone to illicit opioid users for lay overdose reversal in Russian cities.
METHOD: This study adapted an integrated Markov and decision analytic model to Russian cities. The model took a lifetime, societal perspective, relied on published literature, and was calibrated to epidemiologic findings.
RESULTS: For each 20% of heroin users reached with naloxone distribution, the model predicted a 13.4% reduction in overdose deaths in the first 5 years and 7.6% over a lifetime; on probabilistic analysis, one death would be prevented for every 89 naloxone kits distributed (95% CI = 32-260). Naloxone distribution was cost-effective in all deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses and cost-saving if resulting in a reduction in overdose events. Naloxone distribution increased costs by US$13 (95% CI = US$3-US$32) and QALYs by 0.137 (95% CI = 0.022-0.389) for an incremental cost of US$94 per QALY gained (95% CI = US$40-US$325). In a worst-case scenario where overdose was rarely witnessed and naloxone was rarely used, minimally effective, and expensive, the incremental cost was US$1987 per QALY gained. If national expenditures on drug-related HIV, tuberculosis, and criminal justice were applied to heroin users, the incremental cost was US$928 per QALY gained.
CONCLUSIONS: Naloxone distribution to heroin users for lay overdose reversal is highly likely to reduce overdose deaths in target communities and is robustly cost-effective, even within the constraints of this conservative model.
METHOD: This study adapted an integrated Markov and decision analytic model to Russian cities. The model took a lifetime, societal perspective, relied on published literature, and was calibrated to epidemiologic findings.
RESULTS: For each 20% of heroin users reached with naloxone distribution, the model predicted a 13.4% reduction in overdose deaths in the first 5 years and 7.6% over a lifetime; on probabilistic analysis, one death would be prevented for every 89 naloxone kits distributed (95% CI = 32-260). Naloxone distribution was cost-effective in all deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses and cost-saving if resulting in a reduction in overdose events. Naloxone distribution increased costs by US$13 (95% CI = US$3-US$32) and QALYs by 0.137 (95% CI = 0.022-0.389) for an incremental cost of US$94 per QALY gained (95% CI = US$40-US$325). In a worst-case scenario where overdose was rarely witnessed and naloxone was rarely used, minimally effective, and expensive, the incremental cost was US$1987 per QALY gained. If national expenditures on drug-related HIV, tuberculosis, and criminal justice were applied to heroin users, the incremental cost was US$928 per QALY gained.
CONCLUSIONS: Naloxone distribution to heroin users for lay overdose reversal is highly likely to reduce overdose deaths in target communities and is robustly cost-effective, even within the constraints of this conservative model.