Objective: The United States Public Health Service (USPHS) published recommendations for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) of healthcare workers in May 1998. The aim of this study was to analyse the cost effectiveness of the USPHS PEP guidelines. Design and setting: This was a modelling study in the setting of the US healthcare system in 1998. The analysis was performed from the societal perspective; however, only HIV healthcare costs were considered and health-related losses of productivity were not included. Methods: A decision tree incorporating a Markov model was created for 4 PEP strategies: the current USPHS recommendations, triple drug therapy, zidovudine monotherapy or no prophylaxis. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis using a Monte Carlo simulation was performed. Confidence intervals (CIs) around cost-effectiveness estimates were estimated by a bootstrapping method. Results: The costs (in 1997 US dollars) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) saved by each strategy were as follows: monotherapy $US688 (95% CI: $US624 to $US750); USPHS recommendations $US5211 (95% CI: $US5126 to $US5293); and triple drug therapy $US8827 (95% CI: $US8715 to $US8940). The marginal cost per year of life saved was: USPHS recommendations $US81 987 (95% CI: $US80 437 to $US83 689); triple drug therapy $US970 451 (95% CI: $US924 786 to $US1 014 429). Sensitivity testing showed that estimates of the probability of seroconversion for each category of exposure were most influential, but did not change the order of strategies in the baseline analysis. With the prolonged HIV stage durations and increased costs associated with recent innovations in HIV therapy, the marginal cost effectiveness of the USPHS PEP strategy was decreased to $US62 497/QALYsaved. All 3 intervention strategies were cost effective compared with no postexposure prophylaxis. Conclusions: Current USPHS PEP recommendations are marginally cost effective compared with monotherapy, but the additional efficacy of triple drug therapy for all risk categories is rewarded by only a small reduction in HIV infections at great expense. For the foreseeable future, assuming innovations in therapy that employ expensive drug combinations earlier in the HIV disease course to extend life expectancy and the increasing prevalence of HIV drug resistance, our model supports the use of the USPHS PEP guidelines.
目的:美国公共卫生服务 (U
SPHS) 于 1998 年 5 月发布了针对医护人员的人类免疫缺陷病毒 (HIV) 暴露后预防 (PEP) 的建议。本研究的目的是分析 U
SPHS PEP 指南的成本效益。设计和背景:这是一项以1998年美国医疗保健系统为背景的模型研究。从社会角度进行分析;然而,仅考虑了艾滋病毒医疗保健费用,并未包括与健康相关的生产力损失。方法:为 4 种 PEP 策略创建了包含马尔可夫模型的决策树:当前 U
SPHS 建议、三联药物治疗、
齐多夫定单药治疗或无预防。使用蒙特卡罗模拟进行概率敏感性分析。围绕成本效益估计的置信区间(CI)是通过引导法估计的。结果:每种策略节省的每个质量调整生命年 (QALY) 的成本(以 1997 美元计)如下:单一疗法 688 美元(95% CI:624 美元至 750 美元); U
SPHS 建议 5211 美元(95% CI:5126 美元至 5293 美元);三联药物治疗 8827 美元(95% CI:8715 美元至 8940 美元)。每年挽救生命的边际成本为: U
SPHS 建议 81 987 美元(95% CI:80 437 美元至 83 689 美元);三联药物治疗 970 451 美元(95% CI:924 786 美元至 1 014 429 美元)。敏感性测试表明,对每种暴露类别的血清转化概率的估计影响最大,但并没有改变基线分析中策略的顺序。随着 HIV 阶段持续时间的延长以及与近期 HIV 治疗创新相关的成本增加,U
SPHS PEP 策略的边际成本效益降低至 62 497 美元/QALY 节省。与无暴露后预防相比,所有 3 种干预策略均具有成本效益。结论:目前的 U
SPHS PEP 建议与单一疗法相比,成本效益稍高,但三联药物疗法对所有风险类别的额外疗效仅以高昂的费用小幅减少 HIV 感染而得到回报。在可预见的未来,假设治疗创新在 HIV 病程早期采用昂贵的药物组合来延长预期寿命,并且 HIV 耐药性的患病率不断增加,我们的模型支持使用 U
SPHS PEP 指南。