ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of neuromuscular ultrasound (NMUS) for the evaluation of focal neuropathies.MethodsA prior prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled trial demonstrated that NMUS, when added to electrodiagnostic testing, resulted in improved clinical outcomes after 6 months of follow-up. From this study, we abstracted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) from the 36-item Short Form Health Survey and entered this health-utility estimate into a mixed trial and model-based cost-effectiveness analysis from the societal perspective. Costs of intervention (NMUS) were estimated from Medicare payment rates for Current Procedural Terminology codes. Health care use was otherwise estimated to be equal, but sensitivity analyses further examined this and other key assumptions. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used as the primary outcome with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY.ResultsThe predicted mean health outcome associated with use of NMUS was 0.079 QALY, and the mean cost was $37, resulting in an ICER of $463 per QALY. Results and conclusions remained robust across all sensitivity analyses, including variations in time horizon, initial distribution of health states, costs, and effectiveness.ConclusionsFrom a societal perspective, the addition of NMUS to electrodiagnostic testing when evaluating a focal neuropathy is cost-effective. A study of longer follow-up incorporating total health care use would further quantify the value of NMUS.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier:NCT01394822.
Socioeconomic position and mental health care use before and after first redeemed antidepressant and time until subsequent contact to psychologist or psychiatrists: a nationwide Danish follow-up study
