Key result
For older adults with ILI, PCR testing was the most cost-effective strategy to guide antiviral treatment, while clinical judgment was cost-effective for younger adults given high influenza probability.
Why the study?
What is the most cost-effective strategy for influenza testing and antiviral treatment in patients presenting with influenza-like illness?
What is the most cost-effective strategy for influenza testing and antiviral treatment in patients presenting with influenza-like illness?
PCR testing or highly sensitive clinical judgment are the most cost-effective strategies for guiding antiviral treatment in patients with influenza-like illness, particularly in older adults.
May inform age-stratified antiviral strategies in ILI; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Due to the unpredictable burden of pandemic influenza, the best strategy to manage testing, such as rapid or polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and antiviral medications for patients who present with influenza-like illness (ILI) is unknown. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We developed a set of computer simulation models to evaluate the potential economic value of seven strategies under seasonal and pandemic influenza conditions: (1) using clinical judgment alone to guide antiviral use, (2) using PCR to determine whether to initiate antivirals, (3) using a rapid (point-of-care) test to determine antiviral use, (4) using a combination of a point-of-care test and clinical judgment, (5) using clinical judgment and confirming the diagnosis with PCR testing, (6) treating all with antivirals, and (7) not treating anyone with antivirals. For healthy younger adults (<65 years old) presenting with ILI in a seasonal influenza scenario, strategies were only cost-effective from the societal perspective. Clinical judgment, followed by PCR and point-of-care testing, was found to be cost-effective given a high influenza probability. Doubling hospitalization risk and mortality (representing either higher risk individuals or more virulent strains) made using clinical judgment to guide antiviral decision-making cost-effective, as well as PCR testing, point-of-care testing, and point-of-care testing used in conjunction with clinical judgment. For older adults (> or = 65 years old), in both seasonal and pandemic influenza scenarios, employing PCR was the most cost-effective option, with the closest competitor being clinical judgment (when judgment accuracy > or = 50%). Point-of-care testing plus clinical judgment was cost-effective with higher probabilities of influenza. Treating all symptomatic ILI patients with antivirals was cost-effective only in older adults. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our study delineated the conditions under which different testing and antiviral strategies may be cost-effective, showing the importance of accuracy, as seen with PCR or highly sensitive clinical judgment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2010) studied Influenza-like illness (ILI). Influenza testing and antiviral treatment strategies (PCR, rapid test, clinical judgment, treat all) vs. Not treating anyone with antivirals / alternative strategies was evaluated on Cost-effectiveness. For older adults with ILI, PCR testing was the most cost-effective strategy to guide antiviral treatment, while clinical judgment was cost-effective for younger adults given high influenza probability.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: