In primary care, is measuring free-thyroxine plus thyroid-stimulating hormone to detect hypopituitarism cost-effective? A cost utility analysis using Markov chain models

Objective We examined whether it is cost-effective to measure free thyroxine (FT4) in addition to thyrotropin (thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH)) on all requests for thyroid function tests from primary care on adult patients.Background Hypopituitarism occurs in about 4 people per 100 000 per year. L...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Brian Shine, Tim James, Amanda Adler
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMJ Publishing Group 2019-07-01
Series:BMJ Open
Online Access:https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/7/e029369.full
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850265881085476864
author Brian Shine
Tim James
Amanda Adler
author_facet Brian Shine
Tim James
Amanda Adler
author_sort Brian Shine
collection DOAJ
description Objective We examined whether it is cost-effective to measure free thyroxine (FT4) in addition to thyrotropin (thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH)) on all requests for thyroid function tests from primary care on adult patients.Background Hypopituitarism occurs in about 4 people per 100 000 per year. Loss of thyrotropin (TSH) secretion may lead to secondary hypothyroidism with a low TSH and low FT4, and this pattern may help to diagnose hypopituitarism that might otherwise be missed.Design Markov model simulation.Primary outcome measure Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), the ratio of cost in pounds to benefit in quality-adjusted life years of this strategy.Results The ICER for this strategy was £71 437. Factors with a large influence on the ICER were the utilities of the treated hypopituitary state, the likelihood of going to the general practitioner (GP) and of the GP recognising a hypopituitary patient. The ICER would be below £20 000 at a cost to the user of an FT4 measurement of £0.61.Conclusion With FT4 measurements at their present cost to the user, routine inclusion of FT4 in a thyroid hormone profile is not cost-effective.
format Article
id doaj-art-aee27500f6344ea2b18dfc801eb87a82
institution OA Journals
issn 2044-6055
language English
publishDate 2019-07-01
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format Article
series BMJ Open
spelling doaj-art-aee27500f6344ea2b18dfc801eb87a822025-08-20T01:54:18ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552019-07-019710.1136/bmjopen-2019-029369In primary care, is measuring free-thyroxine plus thyroid-stimulating hormone to detect hypopituitarism cost-effective? A cost utility analysis using Markov chain modelsBrian Shine0Tim James1Amanda Adler2Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UKDepartment of Clinical Biochemistry, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK10 Diabetes Trial Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKObjective We examined whether it is cost-effective to measure free thyroxine (FT4) in addition to thyrotropin (thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH)) on all requests for thyroid function tests from primary care on adult patients.Background Hypopituitarism occurs in about 4 people per 100 000 per year. Loss of thyrotropin (TSH) secretion may lead to secondary hypothyroidism with a low TSH and low FT4, and this pattern may help to diagnose hypopituitarism that might otherwise be missed.Design Markov model simulation.Primary outcome measure Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), the ratio of cost in pounds to benefit in quality-adjusted life years of this strategy.Results The ICER for this strategy was £71 437. Factors with a large influence on the ICER were the utilities of the treated hypopituitary state, the likelihood of going to the general practitioner (GP) and of the GP recognising a hypopituitary patient. The ICER would be below £20 000 at a cost to the user of an FT4 measurement of £0.61.Conclusion With FT4 measurements at their present cost to the user, routine inclusion of FT4 in a thyroid hormone profile is not cost-effective.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/7/e029369.full
spellingShingle Brian Shine
Tim James
Amanda Adler
In primary care, is measuring free-thyroxine plus thyroid-stimulating hormone to detect hypopituitarism cost-effective? A cost utility analysis using Markov chain models
BMJ Open
title In primary care, is measuring free-thyroxine plus thyroid-stimulating hormone to detect hypopituitarism cost-effective? A cost utility analysis using Markov chain models
title_full In primary care, is measuring free-thyroxine plus thyroid-stimulating hormone to detect hypopituitarism cost-effective? A cost utility analysis using Markov chain models
title_fullStr In primary care, is measuring free-thyroxine plus thyroid-stimulating hormone to detect hypopituitarism cost-effective? A cost utility analysis using Markov chain models
title_full_unstemmed In primary care, is measuring free-thyroxine plus thyroid-stimulating hormone to detect hypopituitarism cost-effective? A cost utility analysis using Markov chain models
title_short In primary care, is measuring free-thyroxine plus thyroid-stimulating hormone to detect hypopituitarism cost-effective? A cost utility analysis using Markov chain models
title_sort in primary care is measuring free thyroxine plus thyroid stimulating hormone to detect hypopituitarism cost effective a cost utility analysis using markov chain models
url https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/7/e029369.full
work_keys_str_mv AT brianshine inprimarycareismeasuringfreethyroxineplusthyroidstimulatinghormonetodetecthypopituitarismcosteffectiveacostutilityanalysisusingmarkovchainmodels
AT timjames inprimarycareismeasuringfreethyroxineplusthyroidstimulatinghormonetodetecthypopituitarismcosteffectiveacostutilityanalysisusingmarkovchainmodels
AT amandaadler inprimarycareismeasuringfreethyroxineplusthyroidstimulatinghormonetodetecthypopituitarismcosteffectiveacostutilityanalysisusingmarkovchainmodels