国产与进口同类器械在房颤患者射频消融治疗中的卫生经济学评价

Health Economic Evaluation on Domestic and Imported Devices of Radiofrequency Ablation in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

目的:从支付方角度,对国产公司研发的ColumbusTM系统及配套导管与某进口公司CartoTM3系统及配套导管进行成本效用比较。方法:采用构建消融术后一年期的决策树分析模型,进行成本效用和灵敏度分析。结果:进口产品可使患者平均获得0.7681个质量调整生命年,人均器械费用66332元;国产产品可使患者获得0.7647个质量调整生命年,人均器械费用为42566.34元。为多获得一个质量调整生命年,进口产品需多付出6989900元成本,远高于我国可承受的支付意愿值161940元。概率灵敏度分析结果,进口产品增量成本效果比值远高于我国可承受的支付意愿值。结论:比较两个产品的成本效用分析结果,国产产品具有明确的成本效果优势,在治疗持续性房颤时,比进口产品更具有成本效益。建议在集中招标采购、医保报销目录制定等决策中予以关注。

Objective： To analyze cost utility between ColumbusTMand CartoTM3 from the payer＇s perspective. Methods： This study developed a one-year decision model to compare the health outcome and cost. The cost data of only medical devices cost was collected from payer＇s perspective. The sensitivity analysis was conducted. Results： The health outcome were 0. 7647 QALY and 0. 7681 QALY separately for domestic and imported devices. The cost per surgical operation were 42566. 34 RMB and 66332 RMB for domestic and imported devices. Compared to domestic devices,6989900 RMB would be cost for one more QALY gained,which was much more than the willingness-to-pay of 161940 RMB.Conclusion： This research showed that domestic devices had better cost utility than imported devices,which is proposed to be preferable considered compared to imported devices in decision making.