scholarly journals Managing Small Ureteral Stones: A Retrospective Study on Follow-Up, Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness of Conservative Management vs. Early Surgery

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aristeidis Alevizopoulos ◽  
Dimitrios Zosimas ◽  
Lamprini Piha ◽  
Milad Hanna ◽  
Konstantinos Charitopoulos

Introduction: The management of ureteral calculi has evolved over the past decades with the advent of new surgical and medical treatments. The current guidelines support conservative management as a possible approach for ureteral stones sized = 10 mm. Objectives: We purport to follow the natural history of ureteral stones managed conservatively in this retrospective study, and attempt to ascribe an estimated health-care and cost-effectiveness, from presentation to time of being stone-free. Materials and methods: 192 male and female patients with a single ureteral stone sized = 10 mm were included in this study. The clinical and cost-related outcome was analyzed for different stone sizes (0-4, 4-6 and 6-10 mm). The effectiveness of selected follow-up (FU) scans was also analyzed. Results: Stone size was found to be related to the degree of hydronephrosis and to the likelihood of need for a surgical management. Conservative management was found to be clinically effective, as 88% of the patients did not require surgery for their stone. 96.1% of the patients with a stone 0-4mm managed to expel their ureteral stone. Bigger ureteral stones were found to be more costly. The cost-effectiveness of the single FU scans was found to be related to their efficiency, while the global cost-effectiveness of conservative management vs. early surgery was higher for smaller stones (26.8 vs. 17.32% for stones 0-4 vs. 6-10 mm). Conclusion: Conservative management is clinically effective with a significant cost-benefit, particularly for the subgroup of stones sized 0-4 mm, where a need for FU scans is in dispute.

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (55) ◽  
pp. 1-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miriam Brazzelli ◽  
Moira Cruickshank ◽  
Mary Kilonzo ◽  
Irfan Ahmed ◽  
Fiona Stewart ◽  
...  

BackgroundApproximately 10–15% of the adult population suffer from gallstone disease, cholelithiasis, with more women than men being affected. Cholecystectomy is the treatment of choice for people who present with biliary pain or acute cholecystitis and evidence of gallstones. However, some people do not experience a recurrence after an initial episode of biliary pain or cholecystitis. As most of the current research focuses on the surgical management of the disease, less attention has been dedicated to the consequences of conservative management.ObjectivesTo determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cholecystectomy compared with observation/conservative management in people presenting with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones (biliary pain) or cholecystitis.Data sourcesWe searched all major electronic databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, Bioscience Information Service, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from 1980 to September 2012 and we contacted experts in the field.Review methodsEvidence was considered from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised comparative studies that enrolled people with symptomatic gallstone disease (pain attacks only and/or acute cholecystitis). Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Standard meta-analysis techniques were used to combine results from included studies. A de novo Markov model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the interventions.ResultsTwo Norwegian RCTs involving 201 participants were included. Eighty-eight per cent of people randomised to surgery and 45% of people randomised to observation underwent cholecystectomy during the 14-year follow-up period. Participants randomised to observation were significantly more likely to experience gallstone-related complications [risk ratio = 6.69; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57 to 28.51;p = 0.01], in particular acute cholecystitis (risk ratio = 9.55; 95% CI 1.25 to 73.27;p = 0.03), and less likely to undergo surgery (risk ratio = 0.50; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.73;p = 0.0004), experience surgery-related complications (risk ratio = 0.36; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.81;p = 0.01) or, more specifically, minor surgery-related complications (risk ratio = 0.11; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.56;p = 0.008) than those randomised to surgery. Fifty-five per cent of people randomised to observation did not require an operation during the 14-year follow-up period and 12% of people randomised to cholecystectomy did not undergo the scheduled operation. The results of the economic evaluation suggest that, on average, the surgery strategy costs £1236 more per patient than the conservative management strategy but was, on average, more effective. An increase in the number of people requiring surgery while treated conservatively corresponded to a reduction in the cost-effectiveness of the conservative strategy. There was uncertainty around some of the parameters used in the economic model.ConclusionsThe results of this assessment indicate that cholecystectomy is still the treatment of choice for many symptomatic people. However, approximately half of the people in the observation group did not require surgery or suffer complications in the long term indicating that a conservative therapeutic approach may represent a valid alternative to surgery in this group of people. Owing to the dearth of current evidence in the UK setting a large, well-designed, multicentre trial is needed.Study registrationThe study was registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002817FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.


SLEEP ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. A177-A177
Author(s):  
Jaejin An ◽  
Dennis Hwang ◽  
Jiaxiao Shi ◽  
Amy Sawyer ◽  
Aiyu Chen ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Trial-based tele-obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) cost-effectiveness analyses have often been inconclusive due to small sample sizes and short follow-up. In this study, we report the cost-effectiveness of Tele-OSA using a larger sample from a 3-month trial that was augmented with 2.75 additional years of epidemiologic follow-up. Methods The Tele-OSA study was a 3-month randomized trial conducted in Kaiser Permanente Southern California that demonstrated improved adherence in patients receiving automated feedback messaging regarding their positive airway pressure (PAP) use when compared to usual care. At the end of the 3 months, participants in the intervention group pseudo-randomly either stopped or continued receiving messaging. This analysis included those participants who had moderate-severe OSA (Apnea Hypopnea Index >=15) and compared the cost-effectiveness of 3 groups: 1) no messaging, 2) messaging for 3 months only, and 3) messaging for 3 years. Costs were derived by multiplying medical service use from electronic medical records times costs from Federal fee schedules. Effects were average nightly hours of PAP use. We report the incremental cost per incremental hour of PAP use as well as the fraction acceptable. Results We included 256 patients with moderate-severe OSA (Group 1, n=132; Group 2, n=79; Group 3, n=45). Group 2, which received the intervention for 3 months only, had the highest costs and fewest hours of use and was dominated by the other two groups. Average 1-year costs for groups 1 and 3 were $6035 (SE, $477) and $6154 (SE, $575), respectively; average nightly hours of PAP use were 3.07 (SE, 0.23) and 4.09 (SE, 0.42). Compared to no messaging, messaging for 3 years had an incremental cost ($119, p=0.86) per incremental hour of use (1.02, p=0.03) of $117. For a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $500 per year ($1.37/night), 3-year messaging has a 70% chance of being acceptable. Conclusion Long-term Tele-OSA messaging was more effective than no messaging for PAP use outcomes but also highly likely cost-effective with an acceptable willingness-to-pay threshold. Epidemiologic evidence suggests that this greater use will yield both clinical and additional economic benefits. Support (if any) Tele-OSA study was supported by the AASM Foundation SRA Grant #: 104-SR-13


2016 ◽  
Vol 65 (3) ◽  
pp. 215-222
Author(s):  
Rosemeri Siqueira Pedroso ◽  
Luciano Santos Pinto Guimarães ◽  
Luciana Bohrer Zanetello ◽  
Veralice Maria Gonçalves ◽  
Ronaldo Lopes-Rosa ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Objective The objective of the present study was to evaluate 88 adolescent crack users referred to hospitalization and to follow them up after discharge to investigate relapse and factors associated with treatment. Methods Cohort (30 and 90 days after discharge) from a psychiatric hospital and a rehab clinic for treatment for chemical dependency in Porto Alegre between 2011 and 2012. Instruments: Semi-structured interview, conducted to evaluate the sociodemographic profile of the sample and describe the pattern of psychoactive substance use; Crack Use Relapse Scale/CURS; Questionnaire Tracking Users to Crack/QTUC; K-SADS-PL. Results In the first follow-up period (30 days after discharge), 65.9% of participants had relapsed. In the second follow-up period (90 days after discharge), 86.4% of participants had relapsed. Conclusion This is one of the first studies that show the extremely high prevalence of early relapse in adolescent crack users after discharge, questioning the cost/benefit of inpatient treatment for this population. Moreover, these results corroborate studies which suggested, young psychostimulants users might need tailored intensive outpatient treatment with contingency management and other behavioral strategies, in order to increase compliance and reduce drug or crime relapse, but this specific therapeutic modality is still scarce and must be developed in Brazil.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S524-S525
Author(s):  
David Zhang ◽  
Julia Rosebush ◽  
Palak Bhagat ◽  
Allison Nelson ◽  
Veena Ramaiah ◽  
...  

Abstract Background In July 2017, The University of Chicago Comer Children’s Hospital Emergency Department (ED) transitioned from a 5-day to a 28-day HIV nPEP (non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis) dispensation model in an effort to increase adherence. Anecdotal reports of patients lost to follow-up after ED discharge called into question the utility and cost-effectiveness of this practice. We analyzed HIV nPEP follow-up rates in our clinic, explored reasons for nonadherence, and performed basic cost-savings analyses to inform potential changes to our dispensation model. Methods A retrospective review of both electronic health and pharmacy records was conducted for patients prescribed 28-days of HIV nPEP in the ED and scheduled for outpatient follow-up in Pediatric ID clinic from July 2017-June 2019. Clinic provider documentation of nPEP adherence and reasons for nonadherence were examined. Patients were given an initial dose of nPEP regimen in the ED and provided all subsequent doses to complete at home. Using average wholesale price (AWP), we calculated the total cost of each regimen and potential savings if a shorter duration of HIV nPEP supply was dispensed. Results 50 patients received a 28-day supply of HIV nPEP. Please refer to Table 1 regarding baseline patient characteristics. Of these, only 19 (38%) patients had documented outpatient follow-up after nPEP initiation. Median time to follow-up was 6 days (IQR: 3.0-9.0 days). Of the 19 patients with follow-up, 3 admitted to medication non-adherence. Although side effects were elicited in a total of 9 patients (18%), only 1 cited medication intolerance as the reason for discontinuing their nPEP. Given the relatively short time to follow-up, a potential savings of $1720-2211/patient could be achieved if a 10-14 day supply was dispensed. Conclusion Outpatient follow-up after 28-day HIV nPEP dispensation in our ED was < 40%, calling into question the cost-effectiveness of this dispensation model. While our current practice alleviates nPEP interruption due to potential insurance issues and pick-up delays, follow-up and adherence are not assured. The significant cost-savings with a shorter supply at the outset may encourage more robust follow-up and adherence. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. e035552
Author(s):  
Gemma E Shields ◽  
Adrian Wells ◽  
Patrick Doherty ◽  
David Reeves ◽  
Lora Capobianco ◽  
...  

IntroductionCardiac rehabilitation (CR) is offered to reduce the risk of further cardiac events and to improve patients’ health and quality of life following a cardiac event. Psychological care is a common component of CR as symptoms of depression and/or anxiety are more prevalent in this population, however evidence for the cost-effectiveness of current interventions is limited. Metacognitive therapy (MCT), is a recent treatment development that is effective in treating anxiety and depression in mental health settings and is being evaluated in CR patients. This protocol describes the planned approach to the economic evaluation of MCT for CR patients.Methods and analysisThe economic evaluation work will consist of a within-trial analysis and an economic model. The PATHWAY Group MCT study has been prospectively designed to collect comprehensive self-reported resource use and health outcome data, including the EQ-5D, within a randomised controlled trial study design (UK Clinical Trials Gateway). A within-trial economic evaluation and economic model will compare the cost-effectiveness of MCT plus usual care (UC) to UC, from a health and social care perspective in the UK. The within-trial analysis will use intention-to-treat and estimate total costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for the trial follow-up. Single imputation will be used to impute missing baseline variables. Multiple imputation will be used to impute values missing at follow-up. Items of resource use will be multiplied by published national healthcare costs. Regression analysis will be used to estimate net costs and net QALYs and these estimates will be bootstrapped to generate 10 000 net pairs of costs and QALYs to inform the probability of cost-effectiveness. A decision analytical economic model will be developed to synthesise trial data with the published literature over a longer time frame. Sensitivity analysis will explore uncertainty. Guidance of the methods for economic models will be followed and dissemination will adhere to reporting guidelines.Ethics and disseminationThe economic evaluation includes a within-trial analysis. The trial which included the collection of this data was reviewed and approved by Ethics. Ethics approval was obtained by the Preston Research Ethics Committee (project ID 156862). The modelling analysis is not applicable for Ethics as it will use data from the trial (secondary analysis) and the published literature. Results of the main trial and economic evaluation will be published in the peer-reviewed National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) journals library (Programme Grants for Applied Research), submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at appropriate conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN74643496; Pre-results.


Author(s):  
Colin Palfrey

This chapter examines the techniques used by health economists to evaluate the value for money of health promotion initiatives. It first provides an overview of concepts related to economics and health economics, including efficiency, equality, equity and accessibility. Efficiency can be evaluated in terms of cost-minimisation, cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit and cost-utility. The chapter then considers the various rationing strategies by which the NHS can try to reduce expenditure, the use of QALYs to compare the cost-effectiveness of health promotion projects, and conjoint analysis. It also explains how health economists calculate the cost to society of unhealthy lifestyles such as obesity and smoking, and goes on to tackle the question of prevention vs cure in health promotion, the expenditure on the NHS, and the limitations of health economics in evaluation of health promotion endeavours. The chapter concludes with an assessment of how to estimate the costs of health promotion.


2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina Maria Dorothea Bolz ◽  
Ross W. Crawford ◽  
Bill Donnelly ◽  
Sarah L. Whitehouse ◽  
Nicholas Graves

2004 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 931-937 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. A. A. Tjalma ◽  
P. A. Van Dam ◽  
A. P. Makar ◽  
D. J. Cruickshank

The aim of the present article was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of follow-up in endometrial cancer patients. A literature review was performed regarding the studies that addressed routine follow-up of endometrial cancer. For each published study, the costs of the follow-up program were calculated according to Belgium standards. A mean total of 13% relapsed. Symptomatology and clinical examination detected over 83% of the recurrences. The follow-up cost in euro after 5 and 10 years ranged between 127.68 and 2028.78 and between 207.48 and 2353.48, respectively. Based on the available data, there is little evidence of routine follow-up improving survival rates. Multiple protocols are used in practice without an evidence base. There is an urgent need for prospective randomized studies to evaluate the value of the current so-called ‘standard medical practice of follow-up.’ It is to be expected that the cost of follow-up could be reduced considerably, for instance, by tailoring to low- and high-risk groups, or by abandoning routine follow-up. Symptomatic patients, however, should be evaluated immediately. A reduction in the number of visits and examinations would mean an enormous reduction in costs. This economic benefit would be warmly welcomed in the times of increased health costs and decreased budgets.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document