BACKGROUND: We set out to examine which treatment option available in the United States was most cost-effective in treating children with endemic group A streptococcal pharyngitis to prevent rheumatic heart disease. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness was calculated from the societal perspective and expressed in cases of rheumatic heart disease prevented annually in the U.S. pediatric population aged 5 to 17 based on U.S. Census data. We used a decision-analysis model to assess the cost-effectiveness of five treatment options for patients with pharyngitis: (1) "treat all," (2) "treat none," (3) "rapid test," where only patients with a positive rapid antigen test are treated, (4) "culture," where only patients with a positive throat culture are treated, and (5) "rapid test with culture" or (RTCX), where confirmatory cultures are used on patients with negative rapid tests. Cost data were gathered from existing empirical data or estimated. We performed sensitivity analyses of the antigen test sensitivity and antibiotic effectiveness and examined whether changes in these variables would alter our outcome. RESULTS: The "rapid test" was the most cost-effective option. Using "rapid tests" prevented 85 cases of rheumatic heart disease annually and cost society $727,000 per case prevented. Performing throat cultures instead of "rapid tests" would pick up an additional 11 cases of rheumatic heart disease but would cost $13.7 million for each of these additional cases prevented. The current standard of using throat cultures as a confirmatory test on patients with a negative "rapid" test would detect an additional 21 cases of rheumatic heart disease but cost society an additional $8 million per case prevented. CONCLUSIONS: To reduce the incidence of rheumatic heart disease cost-effectively, the management of pediatric pharyngitis may best be accomplished by using antigen testing. The added costs associated with the remaining treatment options may not be justified, especially, as the sensitivity of the antigen tests continues to improve and closely approaches the sensitivity of the practice standard, throat culture.
BACKGROUND: We set out to examine which treatment option available in the United States was most cost-effective in treating children with endemic group A streptococcal pharyngitis to prevent rheumatic heart disease. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness was calculated from the societal perspective and expressed in cases of rheumatic heart disease prevented annually in the U.S. pediatric population aged 5 to 17 based on U.S. Census data. We used a decision-analysis model to assess the cost-effectiveness of five treatment options for patients with pharyngitis: (1) "treat all," (2) "treat none," (3) "rapid test," where only patients with a positive rapid antigen test are treated, (4) "culture," where only patients with a positive throat culture are treated, and (5) "rapid test with culture" or (RTCX), where confirmatory cultures are used on patients with negative rapid tests. Cost data were gathered from existing empirical data or estimated. We performed sensitivity analyses of the antigen test sensitivity and antibiotic effectiveness and examined whether changes in these variables would alter our outcome. RESULTS: The "rapid test" was the most cost-effective option. Using "rapid tests" prevented 85 cases of rheumatic heart disease annually and cost society $727,000 per case prevented. Performing throat cultures instead of "rapid tests" would pick up an additional 11 cases of rheumatic heart disease but would cost $13.7 million for each of these additional cases prevented. The current standard of using throat cultures as a confirmatory test on patients with a negative "rapid" test would detect an additional 21 cases of rheumatic heart disease but cost society an additional $8 million per case prevented. CONCLUSIONS: To reduce the incidence of rheumatic heart disease cost-effectively, the management of pediatric pharyngitis may best be accomplished by using antigen testing. The added costs associated with the remaining treatment options may not be justified, especially, as the sensitivity of the antigen tests continues to improve and closely approaches the sensitivity of the practice standard, throat culture.
Authors: Hannah Fraser; Daniel Gallacher; Felix Achana; Rachel Court; Sian Taylor-Phillips; Chidozie Nduka; Chris Stinton; Rebecca Willans; Paramjit Gill; Hema Mistry Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Daniel M Cohen; Michael E Russo; Preeti Jaggi; Jennifer Kline; William Gluckman; Amisha Parekh Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2015-05-13 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Daan Van Brusselen; Erika Vlieghe; Petra Schelstraete; Frederic De Meulder; Christine Vandeputte; Kristien Garmyn; Wim Laffut; Patrick Van de Voorde Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2014-08-12 Impact factor: 3.183
Authors: Carolina Giraldez-Garcia; Beltran Rubio; Jose F Gallegos-Braun; Iñaki Imaz; Jesus Gonzalez-Enriquez; Antonio Sarria-Santamera Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2011-02-11 Impact factor: 3.183
Authors: JaBaris D Swain; Daniel N Pugliese; Joseph Mucumbitsi; Emmanuel K Rusingiza; Nathan Ruhamya; Abel Kagame; Gapira Ganza; Patricia C Come; Suellen Breakey; Bonnie Greenwood; Jochen D Muehlschlegel; Cecilia Patton-Bolman; Agnes Binagwaho; R Morton Bolman Journal: World J Surg Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: A Nissinen; P Strandén; R Myllys; J Takkinen; Y Björkman; P Leinikki; A Siitonen Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2008-07-05 Impact factor: 3.267