Cost effectiveness of a benzodiazepine vs a nonbenzodiazepine-based sedation regimen for mechanically ventilated, critically ill adults

Autor: Roger A. Edwards, James Cucchi, Chelsea E. Magee, John W. Devlin, Justin J. Bioc, Gilles L. Fraser, Joseph F. Dasta
Rok vydání: 2014
Předmět:
Zdroj: Journal of Critical Care. 29:753-757
ISSN: 0883-9441
Popis: Purpose Nonbenzodiazepine sedation (eg, dexmedetomidine or propofol) may be more cost effective than benzodiazepine (BZ) sedation despite its higher acquisition cost. Materials and methods A cost effectiveness (CE) analysis of noncardiac surgery, critically ill adults requiring at least 1 day of mechanical ventilation (MV) and administered either BZ or non-BZ sedation, that cycled health states and costs daily using a Markov model accounting for daily MV use until intensive care unit (ICU) discharge, was conducted from a third-party perspective. Transition probabilities were obtained from a published meta-analysis, and costs were estimated from best evidence. Sensitivity analyses were run for all extubation and discharge probabilities, for different cost estimates and for the specific non-BZ administered. Results When non-BZ rather than BZ sedation was used, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio to avert 1 ICU day while MV or while either MV or non-MV was $3406 and $3136, respectively. The base-case analysis revealed that non-BZ sedation (vs BZ sedation) resulted in higher drug costs ($1327 vs $65) but lower total ICU costs (percent accounted for MV need): $35 380 (71.0%) vs $45 394 (70.6%). Sensitivity analysis revealed that BZ sedation would only be less costly if the daily rate of extubation was at least 16%, and the daily rate of ICU discharge without MV was at least 77%. The incremental CE ratio to avert 1 ICU day while MV or non-MV was similar between the dexmedetomidine and propofol non-BZ options. Conclusions Among MV adults, non-BZ sedation has a more favorable CE ratio than BZ sedation over most cost estimates.
Databáze: OpenAIRE