Which treatments are cost-effective in the management of varicose veins?

2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 153-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Gohel
Keyword(s):  
Health Economic ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Varicose Veins ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Outpatient Setting ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
Great Scrutiny ◽  
Quality Health ◽  
Economic Analyses ◽  
The Cost

In the current economic climate, the cost-effectiveness of health-care interventions is under great scrutiny. In this article, the evidence for cost-effectiveness of treatments for varicose veins is summarized. The majority of studies evaluating treatments for varicose veins have not assessed health economic outcomes, but have focused on clinical and anatomical measures. The cost-effectiveness of treating varicose veins (compared with conservative management) was demonstrated in the REACTIV trial. Other in-trial economic analyses suggested that endovenous interventions are likely to be cost-effective and a decision tree analysis demonstrated that the greatest cost-effectiveness may be present for procedures performed under local or tumescent anaesthesia in the office or outpatient setting. However, the treatment modality that offers the greatest cost-effectiveness remains unclear. In conclusion, endovenous treatment performed in the outpatient setting under local anaesthesia is likely to be the most cost-effective treatment strategy for varicose veins. Better quality health economic analyses are needed to refine this conclusion.

Cost-Effectiveness of Migraine Prevention: The Case of Topiramate in the UK

Cephalalgia ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 1473-1482 ◽  
Author(s):  
JS Brown ◽  
G Papadopoulos ◽  
PJ Neumann ◽  
M Price ◽  
M Friedman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Preventive Treatment ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Health Utility ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life Year ◽  
Migraine Prevention ◽  
Migraine Frequency ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Cost

The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of topiramate vs. no preventive treatment in the UK. Model inputs included baseline migraine frequency, treatment discontinuation and response, preventive and acute medical cost per attack [2005 GBP (£)] and gain in health utility. Outcomes included monthly migraines averted, acute and preventive treatment costs and cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Topiramate was associated with 1.8 fewer monthly migraines and a QALY gain of 0.0384. The incremental cost of topiramate vs. no preventive treatment was about £10 per migraine averted and £5700 per QALY. Results are sensitive to baseline monthly migraine frequency, triptan use rate and the gain in utility. Incorporating savings from reduced work loss (about £36 per month) suggests that topiramate would be cost saving compared with no preventive treatment. This analysis suggests that topiramate is a cost-effective treatment for migraine prevention compared with no preventive treatment.

scholarly journals ANALISIS EFEKTIVITAS BIAYA PASIEN PNEUMONIA BALITA RAWAT INAP DI RUMAH SAKIT BHAYANGKARA MANADO

PHARMACON ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 968
Author(s):  
Monica D. Lestari ◽  
Gayatri Citraningtyas ◽  
Hosea Jaya Edi
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
Retrospective Data Collection ◽  
Keywords Antibiotics ◽  
The Cost

ABSTRACTPneumonia is an infectious disease in the lower respiratory tract that affects the lung tissue. Ceftriaxone and Gentamicin antibiotics are the most numerous and good for use in the treatment of pneumonia, but of the two antibiotics is not yet known the options for more cost effective treatment, so it needs to be done the cost effectiveness analysis in order to facilitate the selection of more cost-effective treatment options especially in toddler. This study aims to determine which therapies are more cost-effective than the use of antibiotics Ceftriaxone and Gentamicin in pneumonia patients in the January-December 2018 period in the Bhayangkara Manado Hospital using descriptive research methods with retrospective data collection. The sample in this study were 22 patients, 12 patients using ceftriaxone antibiotics and 10 patients using gentamicin antibiotics. The results showed that pneumonia treatment in infants using Ceftriaxone antibiotics was more cost-effective with ACER ceftriaxone value of Rp. 503,872 / day and ICER value of Rp. 145,588 / day. Keywords : Antibiotics, CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis), Pharmacoeconomy, Toddler Pneumonia. ABSTRAKPneumonia merupakan penyakit infeksi pada saluran pernapasan bagian bawah yang mengenai jaringan paru. Antibiotik Seftriakson dan Gentamisim yang paling banyak dan baik untuk digunakan dalam pengobatan pneumonia, namun dari kedua antibiotik tersebut belum diketahui pilihan terapi yang lebih cost-effective, sehingga perlu dilakukan analisis efektivitas biaya agar dapat mempermudah dalam pemilihan alternatif pengobatan yang lebih cost-effective khususnya pada balita. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menentukan terapi yang lebih cost-effective dari penggunaan antibiotik Seftriakson dan Gentamisin pada pasien pneumonia rawat inap periode Januari-Desember 2018 di Rumah Sakit Bhayangkara Manado dengan menggunakan metode penelitian deskriptif dengan pengambilan data secara retrospektif. Sampel pada penelitian ini sebanyak 22 pasien yaitu 12 pasien menggunakan antibiotik Seftriakson dan 10 pasien menggunakan antibiotik Gentamisin. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan pengobatan pneumonia pada balita menggunakan antibiotik Seftriakson lebih cost-effective dengan nilai ACER seftriakson sebesar Rp. 503,872/hari dan nilai ICER sebesar Rp. 145.588/hari. Kata Kunci : Pneumonia Balita, Antibiotik, CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis), Farmakoekonomi

scholarly journals Can polygenic risk scores contribute to cost-effective cancer screening? A systematic review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Padraig Dixon ◽  
Edna Keeney ◽  
Jenny C Taylor ◽  
Sarah Wordsworth ◽  
Richard Martin
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Economic ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Polygenic Risk ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Economic Studies

Polygenic risk is known to influence susceptibility to cancer. The use of data on polygenic risk, in conjunction with other predictors of future disease status, may offer significant potential for preventative care through risk-stratified screening programmes. An important element in the evaluation of screening programmes is their cost-effectiveness. We undertook a systematic review of papers evaluating the cost-effectiveness of screening interventions informed by polygenic risk scores compared to more conventional screening modalities. We included papers reporting cost-effectiveness outcomes in the English language published as articles or uploaded onto preprint servers with no restriction on date, type of cancer or form of polygenic risk modelled. We excluded papers evaluating screening interventions that did not report cost-effectiveness outcomes or which had a focus on monogenic risk. We evaluated studies using the Quality of Health Economic Studies checklist. Ten studies were included in the review, which investigated three cancers: prostate (n=5), colorectal (n=3) and breast (n=2). All study designs were cost-utility papers implemented as Markov models (n=6) or microsimulations (n=4). Nine of ten papers scored highly (score >75 on a 0-100) scale) when assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies checklist. Eight of ten studies concluded that polygenic risk informed cancer screening was likely to be more cost-effective than alternatives. However, the included studies lacked robust external data on the cost of polygenic risk stratification, did not account for how very large volumes of polygenic risk data on individuals would be collected and used, did not consider ancestry-related differences in polygenic risk, and did not fully account for downstream economic sequalae stemming from the use of polygenic risk data in these ways. These topics merit attention in future research on how polygenic risk data might contribute to cost-effective cancer screening.

scholarly journals Pegylated versus non-pegylated interferon beta 1a in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: A cost-effectiveness analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amir Hashemi-Meshkini ◽  
Hedieh Sadat Zekri ◽  
Hasan Karimi-Yazdi ◽  
Pardis Zaboli ◽  
Mohammad Ali Sahraian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Interferon Beta ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Pegylated Interferon ◽  
The United States ◽  
Health States ◽  
Payer Perspective ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
The Cost

Background: Pegylated (PEG) interferon beta 1a has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) as an alternative to interferon beta 1a for multiple sclerosis (MS). Due to its higher price, this study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PEG-interferon beta 1-a compared with interferon beta 1a from an Iranian payer perspective. Methods: A Markov model was designed according to health states based on Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and one-month cycles over a 10-year time horizon. Direct medical and non-medical costs were included from a payer perspective. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated around 11111 US dollars (USD) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for the PEG-interferon versus interferon regimen [with currency rate of 29,000 Iranian Rial (IRR) to 1 USD in 2016]. Conclusion: Considering the cost-effectiveness  threshold in Iran [three times of gross domestic product (GDP) per capita or 15,945 USD], PEG-interferon beta 1-a could be considered as a cost effective treatment for Iranian patients with MS.

Cost-effectiveness of using intermittent pneumatic compression to manage hard-to-heal venous leg ulcers in the UK

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (7) ◽  
pp. 544-552
Author(s):  
Julian F Guest ◽  
Karen Staines ◽  
Nina Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Intermittent Pneumatic Compression ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life Year ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Leg Ulcers ◽  
Venous Leg Ulcers ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
The Cost

Objective: To estimate whether thigh-administered intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) could potentially afford the UK's National Health Service (NHS) a cost-effective intervention for the management of hard-to-heal venous leg ulcers (VLUs). Method: A Markov model was constructed depicting the management of hard-to-heal VLUs with IPC plus standard care or standard care alone over a period of 24 weeks. The model estimated the cost-effectiveness of the two interventions in terms of the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained at 2019/20 prices. Results: Treatment of hard-to-heal VLUs with IPC plus standard care instead of standard care alone is expected to increase the probability of healing by 58% (from 0.24 to 0.38) at 24 weeks and increase health-related quality of life over 24 weeks from 0.32 to 0.34 QALYs per patient. Additionally, the cost of treating with IPC plus standard care (£3,020 per patient) instead of standard care alone (£3,037 per patient) has the potential to be cost-neutral if use of this device is stopped after 6 weeks in non-improving wounds. Sensitivity analysis showed that the relative cost-effectiveness of IPC plus standard care remains <£20,000 per QALY with plausible variations in costs and effectiveness. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, the addition of IPC to standard care potentially affords a cost-effective treatment to the NHS for managing hard-to-heal VLUs. However, a controlled study is required to validate the outcomes of this analysis.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Treatment for Esophageal Varices in Japan

1987 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 575-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akira Sasaki ◽  
John M. Eisenberg
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Esophageal Varices ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Japanese Literature ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Injection Sclerotherapy ◽  
Endoscopic Injection ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
The Cost

AbstractWe analyzed the cost-effectiveness of nonemergent treatment for esophageal varices commonly used in Japan (endoscopic injection sclerotherapy, nonshunting direct interruption procedure, and selective shunt). We assessed the cost per survivor from the perspective of the Japanese government and other payors. Epidemiologic and economic data from published Japanese literature and from Japanese hospital-cost information were applied in decision analysis. While sclerotherapy is the most cost-effective treatment, the popular surgical procedures save the most lives, thus raising difficult ethical issues regarding trade-offs of cost and quality.

scholarly journals Cost–effectiveness of tacrolimus for the treatment of moderate-to-severe lupus nephritis in China

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (13) ◽  
pp. 1125-1141
Author(s):  
Soyoung Kim ◽  
Adrian Yit Reen Ooi ◽  
Thomas Stephens ◽  
Hongsi Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Lupus Nephritis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Original Form ◽  
Health States ◽  
Effectiveness Model ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
Tacrolimus Therapy ◽  
The Cost

Aim: Therapy for lupus nephritis (LN) requires treatment with immunosuppressive regimens, often including intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVCY), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) or azathioprine. Additionally, tacrolimus (original form or generic) is recommended to treat LN patients in Asia, including China. However, the cost–effectiveness of tacrolimus therapy has not previously been assessed. We aimed to estimate the cost–effectiveness of tacrolimus in the treatment of moderate-to-severe LN versus standard therapies in China. Materials & methods: This cost–effectiveness model combined a decision-tree/Markov-model structure to map transitions between health states during induction and maintenance treatment phases. Induction with tacrolimus, IVCY or MMF, was followed by tacrolimus, MMF or azathioprine maintenance. Results: According to the model, during induction, complete remission rates were higher with tacrolimus versus IVCY (relative risk 1.40 vs IVCY [deterministic sensitivity analysis minimum 0.92, maximum 2.13]) and time to response was shorter. Relapse rates were lower with tacrolimus versus azathioprine or MMF during maintenance. Tacrolimus induction and maintenance was the most cost-effective regimen, incurring the lowest total costs (CN¥180,448) with the highest quality-adjusted life-years. Conclusion: The model demonstrated that tacrolimus use in both induction and maintenance therapy may be an efficacious and cost-effective treatment for LN in China.

scholarly journals Modelling the cost-effectiveness of pharmacotherapy compared with cognitive–behavioural therapy and combination therapy for the treatment of moderate to severe depression in the UK

2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (14) ◽  
pp. 3019-3031 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Koeser ◽  
V. Donisi ◽  
D. P. Goldberg ◽  
P. McCrone
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Combination Treatment ◽  
Severe Depression ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Effective Treatment Option ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
The Cost

Background.The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England and Wales recommends the combination of pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy for the treatment of moderate to severe depression. However, the cost-effectiveness analysis on which these recommendations are based has not included psychotherapy as monotherapy as a potential option. For this reason, we aimed to update, augment and refine the existing economic evaluation.Method.We constructed a decision analytic model with a 27-month time horizon. We compared pharmacotherapy with cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) and combination treatment for moderate to severe depression in secondary care from a healthcare service perspective. We reviewed the literature to identify relevant evidence and, where possible, synthesized evidence from clinical trials in a meta-analysis to inform model parameters.Results.The model suggested that CBT as monotherapy was most likely to be the most cost-effective treatment option above a threshold of £22 000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). It dominated combination treatment and had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £20 039 per QALY compared with pharmacotherapy. There was significant decision uncertainty in the probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses.Conclusions.Contrary to previous NICE guidance, the results indicated that even for those patients for whom pharmacotherapy is acceptable, CBT as monotherapy may be a cost-effective treatment option. However, this conclusion was based on a limited evidence base, particularly for combination treatment. In addition, this evidence cannot easily be transferred to a primary care setting.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of MR-guided focused ultrasound thalamotomy for tremor-dominant Parkinson’s disease

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ying Meng ◽  
Christopher B. Pople ◽  
Suneil K. Kalia ◽  
Lorraine V. Kalia ◽  
Benjamin Davidson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Health Economic ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Medical Therapy ◽  
Focused Ultrasound ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment

OBJECTIVEThe development of transcranial MR-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) has revitalized the practice of lesioning procedures in functional neurosurgery. Previous health economic analysis found MRgFUS thalamotomy to be a cost-effective treatment for patients with essential tremor, supporting its reimbursement. With the publication of level I evidence in support of MRgFUS thalamotomy for patients with tremor-dominant Parkinson’s disease (TDPD), the authors performed a health economic comparison between MRgFUS, deep brain stimulation (DBS), and medical therapy.METHODSThe authors used a decision tree model with rollback analysis and one-factor sensitivity analysis. Literature searches of MRgFUS thalamotomy and unilateral DBS of the ventrointermediate nucleus of the thalamus for TDPD were performed to determine the utility and probabilities for the model. Costs in Canadian dollars (CAD) were derived from the Schedule of Benefits and Fees in Ontario, Canada, and expert opinion on usage.RESULTSMRgFUS was associated with an expected cost of $14,831 CAD. Adding MRgFUS to continued medical therapy resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $30,078 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), which remained cost-effective under various scenarios in the sensitivity analysis. Comparing DBS to MRgFUS, while DBS did not achieve the willingness-to-pay threshold ($56,503 per QALY) in the base case scenario, it did so under several scenarios in the sensitivity analysis.CONCLUSIONSMRgFUS thalamotomy is a cost-effective treatment for patients with TDPD, particularly over continued medical therapy. While MRgFUS remains competitive with DBS, the cost-effectiveness advantage is less substantial. These results will help inform the integration of this technology in the healthcare system.

Cost-effectiveness of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in locally advanced/borderline resectable pancreatic cancer patients.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16793-e16793
Author(s):  
Myles Ingram ◽  
Brianna N Lauren ◽  
Yoanna S Pumpalova ◽  
Gulam Abbas Manji ◽  
Susan Elaine Bates ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Of Care ◽  
Trial Data ◽  
Borderline Resectable ◽  
Total Cost ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
The Cost

e16793 Background: The 2019 NCCN guidelines recommend neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX or neoadjuvant gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (G-nP) for locally advanced and borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BR/LA PDAC). Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and G-nP have yet to be directly compared in a prospective, randomized trial with BR/LA PDAC patients. The purpose of our study was to incorporate treatment outcomes, toxicity profiles, costs, and quality-of-life measures to further inform clinical decision-making. Methods: We developed a decision-analytic mathematical model to compare the total cost and health outcomes of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX against G-nP over twelve years. Adjuvant gemcitabine (GEM) was used as a comparator. The inputs for the model were estimated using clinical trial data and published literature. We used single-institution retrospective studies to estimate our survival data in the absence of a prospective trial. The primary endpoint was incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY). Secondary endpoints included overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), total cost of care (USD), QALYs, patient resection rate, and monthly treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) costs (USD). Results: FOLFIRINOX was the cost-effective strategy, totaling incremental QALYs of 0.21 at a cost of $52,845.96 per QALY when compared to G-nP. G-nP was also on the efficiency frontier with an ICER of $46,430.73 compared to GEM. More patients received resection with FOLFIRINOX (82.15% vs. 72.40%), but had higher TRAE costs than G-nP ($12,051.26 vs. $4,666.97). A one-way sensitivity analysis found that the FOLFIRINOX ICER exceeds the WTP threshold when TRAE costs are higher and resection rates are lower. Conclusions: Our modeling analysis finds FOLFIRNOX is the cost-effective treatment compared to G-nP for BR/LA PDAC despite having a higher cost of total care due to TRAE costs. Trial data with sufficient follow-up are needed to confirm our findings. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document