复方枸橼酸阿尔维林治疗肠易激综合征的药物经济学分析  

Pharmacoeconomics Analysis on Using Alverine Citrate/Simeticone for Treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome

作　　者：张崖冰[1] 胡善联[2,3] 何江江[2,3] 张钰宣[4] 梅丹[4] 金佳 郑红淑 刘雪松 朱国兰 

机构地区：[1]上海应用技术学院,上海201418 [2]上海市医学科学技术情报研究所上海市卫生发展研究中心,上海200040 [3]复旦大学公共卫生学院,上海200032 [4]中国医学科学院北京协和医院,北京100730 [5]博福益普生制药有限公司,天津300384

出　　处：《中国卫生经济》2016年第2期73-75,共3页Chinese Health Economics

摘　　要：目的:对复方枸橼酸阿尔维林(ACS)治疗肠易激综合征进行药物经济学评价。方法:采用文献研究方法,从全社会的角度对ACS进行成本-效果和成本-效用分析,并对其价格进行敏感性分析。选定Ducrotte等在2013年报道的《枸橼酸阿尔维林西甲硅油按需治疗与常规治疗在肠易激综合征治疗方面的比较:一项随机实用性研究的结果》为原始文献,对其数据进行本土化处理。结果:每降低1分严重程度症状评分,ACS按需治疗组和常规治疗组所需要的成本分别是8.79元和22.94元。与常规治疗组相比,ACS按需治疗组每多降低1分IBS-SSS可以节约17.62元。每改善1分效用值ACS按需治疗组和常规治疗组所需要的成本分别是106.03元和288.62元,ACS按需治疗组每获得一个质量调整生命年可以节约39 431.12元。当ACS的价格上调幅度在96%以下时,ICER和ICUR始终显示节约成本。当ACS的价格上调幅度达到437%时,其ICUR才触及WHO推荐的阈值上限。结论:与常规治疗相比,ACS按需治疗具有明显的药物经济学优势。Objective： To conduct the pharmacoeconomic evaluation of alverine eitrate/simeticone（ACS） for treatment of irritable bowel syndrome（IBS）. Methods： Literature study wass adoptedfor the cost-effectiveness analysis（CEA） and cost-utility analysis（CUA） from social perspective. The sensitivity analysis was conducted on the price. The localization process was conducted on the data, based on the original paper of On-demand treatment with alverine citrate/simeticone compared with standard treatments for irritable bowel syndrome： results of a randomised pragmatic study reported by P. Ducrotte etc. in 2013. Results： The costs of ACS on-demand treat- ment group and routine treatment group were 8.79 yuan anti 22.94 yuan respectively to reduce per IBS-severity symptom score （IBS-SSS）. ACS on-demand treatment group could save 17.62 yuan for additional per IBS-SSS reduction compared with routine treat- ment group. The costs of per utility score of ACS on-demand treatment group and routine treatment group were 106.03 yuan and 288.62 yuan respectively. ACS on-demand treatment group could save 39 431.12 yuan for per quality adjusted life year（QALY）. ICER and 1CUR always showed the saving costs. The ICUR kept cost-saving when the price growth rate of ACS was under 96%. The ICUR would reach the threstlold limit recommended by WHO only when the price growth rate of ACS reached 437%. Conclusion： ACS on-demand treatment had pharmacoeconomic advantage compared with routine treatment.

关 键 词：复方枸橼酸阿尔维林 肠易激综合征 成本-效果分析 成本-效用分析 

分 类 号：R574.4[医药卫生—消化系统]