[Cost-effectiveness analysis high flow oxygen therapy in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia]. / Coste-efectividad de la oxigenoterapia de alto flujo en el tratamiento de la neumonía por SARS-CoV-2.

INTRODUCTION: high-oxygen nasal cannulas in patients with respiratory failure secondary to SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia have not been studied from a cost-effectiveness point of view. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients who had entered the COVID-area of an intensive medicine service in a third reference hospital, between March-December 2020. An effectiveness cost analysis was carried out comparing 2therapeutic decisions: the experimental strategy was defined as a mixed strategy consisting of the initial application of high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) and application of VMI only to HFNO failures. The optimal rational decision was defined as maximizing expected profit, and economic efficiency was assessed by calculating the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) for years of life gained. RESULTS: Of the 185 patients tested, 101 (55%) received invasive mechanical ventilation immediately and 84 (45%) were treated with HFNO at the outset. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, comparing both therapeutic strategies, the probability that the experimental strategy would be more effective was 0.974, reaching statistical significance: Difference in average proportions -0.113; 95% CI:-0.018 to -0.208. This corresponds to an NNT of 9 patients. The optimal decision was HFNO's strategy followed by VMI in HFNO failures. This option had an RCEI of 5582 euros per year of life gained. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to establish in the future reliable markers in the use of HFNO so that this therapy improves its cost-effective benefits.

ADENI-UCI study: Analysis of non-income decisions in ICU as a measure of limitation of life support treatments.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the variables associated with ICU refusal decisions as a life support treatment limitation measure. DESIGN: Prospective, multicentrico. SCOPE: 62 ICU from Spain between February 2018 and March 2019. PATIENTS: Over 18 years of age who were denied entry into ICU as a life support treatment limitation measure. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN INTEREST VARIABLES: Patient comorities, functional situation as measured by the KNAUS and Karnosfky scale; predicted scales of Lee and Charlson; severity of the sick person measured by the APACHE II and SOFA scales, which justifies the decision-making, a person to whom the information is transmitted; date of discharge or in-hospital death, destination for hospital discharge. RESULTS: A total of 2312 non-income decisions were recorded as an LTSV measure of which 2284 were analyzed. The main reason for consultation was respiratory failure (1080 [47.29%]). The poor estimated quality of life of the sick (1417 [62.04%]), the presence of a severe chronic disease (1367 [59.85%]) and the prior functional limitation of patients (1270 [55.60%]) were the main reasons for denying admission. The in-hospital mortality rate was 60.33%. The futility of treatment was found as a risk factor associated with mortality (OR: 3.23; IC95%: 2.62-3.99). CONCLUSIONS: Decisions to limit ICU entry as an LTSV measure are based on the same reasons as decisions made within the ICU. The futility valued by the intensivist is adequately related to the final result of death.