• Am J Emerg Med · Dec 2021

    Cost-effectiveness of field trauma triage among injured children transported by emergency medical services.

    • Daniel K Nishijima, Zhuo Yang, and Craig D Newgard.
    • Department of Emergency Medicine, UC Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA, United States of America. Electronic address: dnishijima@ucdavis.edu.
    • Am J Emerg Med. 2021 Dec 1; 50: 492-500.

    BackgroundA pediatric field triage strategy that meets the national policy benchmark of ≥95% sensitivity would likely improve health outcomes but increase heath care costs. Our objective was to compare the cost-effectiveness of current pediatric field triage practices to an alternative field triage strategy that meets the national policy benchmark of ≥95% sensitivity.Study DesignWe developed a decision-analysis Markov model to compare the outcomes and costs of the two strategies. We used a prospectively collected cohort of 3507 (probability weighted, unweighted n = 2832) injured children transported by 44 emergency medical services (EMS) agencies to 28 trauma and non-trauma centers in the Northwestern United States from 1/1/2011 to 12/31/2011 to derive the alternative field triage strategy and to populate model probability and cost inputs for both strategies. We compared the two strategies by calculating quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and health care costs over a time horizon from the time of injury until death. We set an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio threshold of less than $100,000 per QALY for the alternative field triage to be a cost-effective strategy.ResultsCurrent pediatric field triage practices had a sensitivity of 87.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 71.9 to 95.0%) and a specificity of 82.3% (95% CI 81.0 to 83.5%) and the alternative field triage strategy had a sensitivity of 97.3% (95% CI 82.6 to 99.6%) and a specificity of 46.1% (95% CI 43.8 to 48.4%). The alternative field triage strategy would cost $476,396 per QALY gained compared to current pediatric field triage practices and thus would not be a cost-effective strategy. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated similar findings.ConclusionCurrent field triage practices do not meet national policy benchmarks for sensitivity. However, an alternative field triage strategy that meets the national policy benchmark of ≥95% sensitivity is not a cost-effective strategy.Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.