Letter 2: Prospective randomized trial using cost-utility analysis of earlyversusdelayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute gallbladder disease (Br J Surg2009; 96: 1031-1040)

2009 ◽  
Vol 96 (12) ◽  
pp. 1492-1493 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Mercer
Keyword(s):  
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Gallbladder Disease ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Prospective Randomized Trial ◽  
Utility Analysis

Prospective randomized trial using cost-utility analysis of earlyversusdelayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute gallbladder disease

2009 ◽  
Vol 96 (9) ◽  
pp. 1031-1040 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. A. L. Macafee ◽  
D. J. Humes ◽  
G. Bouliotis ◽  
I. J. Beckingham ◽  
D. K. Whynes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Gallbladder Disease ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Prospective Randomized Trial ◽  
Utility Analysis

scholarly journals Cost utility analysis of long-term telemonitoring of patients with DMT2: Results of the Greek pilot of the renewing health multicenter pragmatic randomized trial

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
George E. Dafoulas ◽  
Afentoula Mavrodi ◽  
Alexandra Bargiota ◽  
Haralambos Giannakakos ◽  
Panagiotis Stafylas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Utility Analysis

scholarly journals Single- Versus Multiple-Fraction Radiotherapy in Patients With Painful Bone Metastases: Cost-Utility Analysis Based on a Randomized Trial

2003 ◽  
Vol 95 (3) ◽  
pp. 222-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. B. van den Hout ◽  
Y. M. van der Linden ◽  
E. Steenland ◽  
R. G. J. Wiggenraad ◽  
J. Kievit ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Painful Bone Metastases ◽  
Single Versus

Economic evaluation of chemotherapy with mitoxantrone plus prednisone for symptomatic hormone-resistant prostate cancer: based on a Canadian randomized trial with palliative end points.

1998 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 2272-2279 ◽  
Author(s):  
D J Bloomfield ◽  
M D Krahn ◽  
T Neogi ◽  
T Panzarella ◽  
T J Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
End Points ◽  
Hormone Resistant Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE To evaluate the economic consequences of the use of chemotherapy in patients with symptomatic hormone-resistant prostate cancer (HRPC) in the context of a previously published Canadian open-label, phase III, randomized trial with palliative end points. PATIENTS AND METHODS The trial randomized 161 patients to initial treatment with mitoxantrone and prednisone (M + P) or to prednisone alone (P) and showed better palliation with M + P. There was no significant difference in survival. A detailed retrospective chart review was performed of resources used from randomization until death of 114 of 161 patients enrolled at the three largest centers: these included hospital admissions, outpatient visits, investigations, therapies (which included all chemotherapy and radiation), and palliative care. Cancer center and community hospital costs were calculated by using the hotel approximation method and case costing from the Ontario Case Cost Project, respectively. Cost-utility analysis was performed by transforming the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 global quality-of-life item measured every 3 weeks on trial to an estimate of utility, and extending the last known value through to death or last follow-up. RESULTS The mean total cost until death or last follow-up by intention-to-treat was M + P CDN $27,300; P CDN $29,000. The 95% confidence intervals on the observed cost difference ranged from a saving of $9,200 for M + P (with palliative benefit) to an increased cost of $5,800 for M + P. The major proportion of cost (M + P 53% v P 66%; CDN $14,500 v $19,100) was for inpatient care. Initial M + P was consistently less expensive in whichever time period was used to compare costs. Cost-utility analysis showed M + P to be the preferred strategy with an upper 95% confidence interval for the incremental cost-utility ratio of CDN $19,700 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). CONCLUSION A treatment that reduces symptoms and improves quality of life has the potential to reduce costs in other areas. Economic factors should not influence the clinical decision as to whether to use M + P in a symptomatic patient.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Open Cholecystectomy in Kashani Hospital, Shahr-e-Kord, Iran

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (S1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahdi Javid ◽  
Mohammad Hadian ◽  
Aziz Rezapour ◽  
Masoud ‎Salehi ◽  
Mehdi Toroski
Keyword(s):  
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy ◽  
Open Cholecystectomy ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Utility Analysis

Cost-utility analysis of eating disorder treatment

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Pohjolainen ◽  
P. Rasanen ◽  
R. P. Roine ◽  
H. Sintonen ◽  
K. Wahlbeck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Eating Disorder ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Eating Disorder Treatment ◽  
Disorder Treatment
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document