期刊文献+

部队甲肝疫苗接种策略的成本-效用分析 被引量:2

COST-UTILITY ANALYSIS OF VACCINATION AGAINST HAV INFECTION IN THE MILITARY
暂未订购
导出
摘要 目的 :探讨部队甲肝疫苗接种的最佳策略 ,为部队甲肝预防提供依据。方法 :以质量调整生命年 (Quality -adjustedlifeyear,QALY)为效用指标进行成本效用分析。结果 :在现有的卫生经济条件下 ,采用先筛选后接种方案 (Screen -Vaccination ,SV)的接种甲肝疫苗的成本效用比 (Cost-utilityratio ,CUR) ,干部为 - 14 0 .37元 /QALY ,新兵为 2 6 6 1.0 4元 /QALY ,明显低于直接接种方案 (Direct -Vaccination ,DV)的CUR ,干部为 80 4 4.0 5元 /QALY ,新兵为 914 2 .96元 /QALY) ,且干部CUR值小于新兵 ,因此部队接种甲肝疫苗应首选SV方案并优先接种干部人群。灵敏度分析表明 ,疫苗保护期、筛选实验费、疫苗保护率等是影响决策方案CUR的主要因素 ,但除疫苗保护期外 ,决策结果不随各参数的波动而发生根本变化。结论 :在目前状况下 ,部队接种甲肝疫苗宜首选SV方案 。 Obiective: To determine the most cost-effective vaccination strategy against HAV infection in the military. Methods: Cost-utility analysis was performed by using quality-adjusted life year ( QALY) as the index of utility. Results: The decision analysis indicated that CUR (Cost-utility ratio) of the screen before vaccination(SV)strategies against Hepatitis A (for officers:$-140.37/QALY, for recruits $2 661.04/QALY) were lower than those of the direct vaccination (DV) strategies ($8 044.05/QALY and $9 142.96/QALY respectively) and CUR for the officers was lower than that of the recruits, so vaccinating against hepatitis A in the military should be given priority to the officers in SV strategy. The sensitivity analysis showed that protection duration of the vaccine, screen cost, protection rate of vaccine were the main factors affecting CUR but the result of decision analysis was fairly insensitive to the fluctuation of the input parameters except the protection duration of vaccine. Conclusion: The officers in the military should be taken as the favorable population for HAV vaccination using SV strategy in the light of cost-utility.
出处 《解放军预防医学杂志》 CAS 北大核心 2002年第4期249-253,共5页 Journal of Preventive Medicine of Chinese People's Liberation Army
基金 全军"九五"指令性课题 (No.96L0 4 9)
关键词 甲肝疫苗 成本效用分析 质量调整生命年 部队卫生 甲型肝炎 vaccine of HAV, cost-utility analysis, quality-adjusted life year
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

二级参考文献23

共引文献24

同被引文献19

  • 1胡善联,陈文,ANNE MANS Lieven,候晓欣.厄贝沙坦治疗中国高血压性2型糖尿病伴有微蛋白尿症患者的成本-效果分析[J].中国药房,2005,16(3):191-194. 被引量:9
  • 2陈宝公,郝明利,黄耀权,周铮,邓永林.胆石症危险参数的临床价值[J].普外临床,1994,9(2):80-81. 被引量:8
  • 3[1]Glennie JL, Torrance GW,Baladi JF, et al. The revised Canadian guidelines for the economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals[J]. Pharmacoeconomics,1999,15(5):459
  • 4[3]Johanna Cook,Jeff Richardson,Andrew Street, et al. A cost utility analysis of treatment options for gallstone disease: methodological issues and results[J]. Health Econ,1994 ,3(3):157
  • 5[10]Habu Y,Matsui T,Hayaski Y, et al. A clinical decision analysis to assess therapeutic modalities for symptomatic gallstones with respect to patients quality of life and cost-effectiveness[J]. Nippon Shokakibyo Crakkai Zasshi,1993,90(11):2895
  • 6[11]Stengele U,Baumgartner BR,Chezmar JC, et al. Biliary lithotripsy bersus cholecystectomy: a cost-utility analysis[J]. J J Lithotr Stone Dis,1999,3(2):133
  • 7Cook J ,Richardson J ,Street A, et al .A cost utility analysis of treatment options for gallstone disease:methodological issues and results [ J ] . Health Econ, 1994,3(3) 157.
  • 8Teerawattananon Y,Mugford M. Is it worth offering a routine laparoscopic cholecystectomy in developing countries? A Thailand case study[J] . Cost Eff Resour Alloc, 2005,3(10) : 10.
  • 9高绪文,聂萍.药物经济学对临床药学的指导作用[J].中国药学杂志,1997,32(10):632-634. 被引量:26
  • 10杨樟卫,张钧.成本-效用分析方法与应用[J].中国药房,1998,9(2):54-55. 被引量:26

引证文献2

二级引证文献4

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部