Pre-operative optimisation employing dopexamine or adrenaline for patients undergoing major elective surgery: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Abstract.Objective: To compare the cost and cost-effectiveness of a policy of pre-operative optimisation of oxygen delivery (using either adrenaline or dopexamine) to reduce the risk associated with major elective surgery, in high-risk patients. Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis using data from a randomised controlled trial (RCT). In the RCT 138 patients undergoing major elective surgery were allocated to receive pre-operative optimisation employing either adrenaline or dopexamine (assigned randomly), or to receive routine peri-operative care. Differential health service costs were based on trial data on the number and cause of hospital in-patient days and the utilisation of health care resources. These were costed using unit costs from a UK hospital. The cost-effectiveness analysis related differential costs to differential life-years during a 2year trial follow-up. Results: The mean number of in-patient days was 16 in the pre-optimised groups (19 adrenaline; 13 dopexamine) and 22 in the standard care group. The number (%) of deaths, over a 2year follow-up, was 24 (26%) in the pre-optimised groups and 15 (33%) in the standard care group. The mean total costs were EUR 11,310 in the pre-optimised groups and EUR 16,965 in the standard care group. Life-years were 1.68 in the pre-optimised groups and 1.46 in the standard care group. The probability that pre-operative optimisation is less costly than standard care is 98%. The probability that it dominates standard care is 93%. Conclusions: Based on resource use and effectiveness data collected in the trial, pre-operative optimisation of high-risk surgical patients undergoing major elective surgery is cost-effective compared with standard treatment.

[1]  O. Boyd,et al.  A cost analysis of a treatment policy of a deliberate perioperative increase in oxygen delivery in high risk surgical patients , 1997, Intensive Care Medicine.

[2]  A H Briggs,et al.  Handling uncertainty when performing economic evaluation of healthcare interventions. , 1999, Health technology assessment.

[3]  A S Detsky,et al.  How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. , 1992, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[4]  I. Woods,et al.  Reducing the risk of major elective surgery: randomised controlled trial of preoperative optimisation of oxygen delivery , 1999, BMJ.

[5]  E. Bennett,et al.  A randomized clinical trial of the effect of deliberate perioperative increase of oxygen delivery on mortality in high-risk surgical patients. , 1993, JAMA.

[6]  Philip D. Harvey,et al.  Cost effectiveness analysis of improved blood pressure control in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 40 , 1998, BMJ.

[7]  J O Chinnis,et al.  BAYESIAN COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS , 2001, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[8]  A Briggs,et al.  The Distribution of Health Care Costs and Their Statistical Analysis for Economic Evaluation , 1998, Journal of health services research & policy.

[9]  M J Al,et al.  Costs, effects and C/E-ratios alongside a clinical trial. , 1994, Health economics.

[10]  A. B. Prasad,et al.  British National Formulary , 1994 .

[11]  W. Shoemaker,et al.  Prospective trial of supranormal values of survivors as therapeutic goals in high-risk surgical patients. , 1988, Chest.

[12]  M. Drummond,et al.  Health Care Technology: Effectiveness, Efficiency and Public Policy@@@Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes , 1988 .