Daniela V Pachito1, Ângela M Bagattini2, Luciano F Drager3, Alan L Eckeli4, Aline Rocha5. 1. Department of Health Technology Assessment, Hospital Sírio-Libanês, Rua Barata Ribeiro 142, São Paulo, 01308-000, Brazil. pachito@uol.com.br. 2. Department of Health Technology Assessment, Hospital Sírio-Libanês, Rua Barata Ribeiro 142, São Paulo, 01308-000, Brazil. 3. Hypertension Unit, Heart Institute (InCor), University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil. 4. Department of Neuroscience and Behavioral Sciences, Ribeirão Preto School of Medicine, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil. 5. Cochrane Brazil, São Paulo, Brazil.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To synthesize findings of economic evaluations investigating cost-effectiveness of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and of strategies of organization of care related to CPAP therapy. METHODS: Scoping review with searches conducted in MEDLINE, CRD, LILACS, and Embase in August 2020. Eligible studies were economic evaluations comparing CPAP to other alternative or assessing strategies of care for CPAP therapy. Results were presented narratively, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were presented in evidence maps. RESULTS: Of 34 studies, 3 concluded that CPAP is less costly and more effective when compared to usual care. Most studies indicated that CPAP is associated with better health outcomes, but at higher prices. ICER ranged from USD 316 to 98,793 per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained (median 16,499; IQR 8267 to 33,119). One study concluded that CPAP is more costly and less effective, when treatment is applied to all patients, regardless of disease severity. Variability of ICER was mainly due to definition of population and applied time horizons. When CPAP was compared to mandibular advancement device, ICER ranged from USD 21,153 to 361,028 (median 89,671; IQR 26,829 to 295,983), which represents the investment in CPAP therapy required to obtain one extra QALY. Three studies assessed the effects of organizing CPAP therapy in primary care, which was cost-effective or cost-saving. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to usual care, CPAP is cost-effective after the second year of treatment, when indicated for moderate-to-severe OSA. CPAP therapy may be even more cost-effective by using different strategies of organization of care. These findings may inform decision making related to CPAP reimbursement in health systems. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.
PURPOSE: To synthesize findings of economic evaluations investigating cost-effectiveness of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and of strategies of organization of care related to CPAP therapy. METHODS: Scoping review with searches conducted in MEDLINE, CRD, LILACS, and Embase in August 2020. Eligible studies were economic evaluations comparing CPAP to other alternative or assessing strategies of care for CPAP therapy. Results were presented narratively, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were presented in evidence maps. RESULTS: Of 34 studies, 3 concluded that CPAP is less costly and more effective when compared to usual care. Most studies indicated that CPAP is associated with better health outcomes, but at higher prices. ICER ranged from USD 316 to 98,793 per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained (median 16,499; IQR 8267 to 33,119). One study concluded that CPAP is more costly and less effective, when treatment is applied to all patients, regardless of disease severity. Variability of ICER was mainly due to definition of population and applied time horizons. When CPAP was compared to mandibular advancement device, ICER ranged from USD 21,153 to 361,028 (median 89,671; IQR 26,829 to 295,983), which represents the investment in CPAP therapy required to obtain one extra QALY. Three studies assessed the effects of organizing CPAP therapy in primary care, which was cost-effective or cost-saving. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to usual care, CPAP is cost-effective after the second year of treatment, when indicated for moderate-to-severe OSA. CPAP therapy may be even more cost-effective by using different strategies of organization of care. These findings may inform decision making related to CPAP reimbursement in health systems. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.
Authors: Adam V Benjafield; Najib T Ayas; Peter R Eastwood; Raphael Heinzer; Mary S M Ip; Mary J Morrell; Carlos M Nunez; Sanjay R Patel; Thomas Penzel; Jean-Louis Pépin; Paul E Peppard; Sanjeev Sinha; Sergio Tufik; Kate Valentine; Atul Malhotra Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2019-07-09 Impact factor: 30.700
Authors: Robert J Doonan; Patrick Scheffler; Marek Lalli; R John Kimoff; Eleni Th Petridou; Marios E Daskalopoulos; Stella S Daskalopoulou Journal: Hypertens Res Date: 2010-10-21 Impact factor: 3.872
Authors: Paul E Peppard; Terry Young; Jodi H Barnet; Mari Palta; Erika W Hagen; Khin Mae Hla Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2013-04-14 Impact factor: 4.897