We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Cost utility analysis of endoscopic sinus surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this work was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) compared to medical therapy for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).
METHODS: The study design consisted of a microsimulation Markov decision-tree economic model with a 31-year time horizon. A cohort of 489 patients who underwent ESS for CRS were matched 1 to 1 with a cohort of 489 patients from the national Medical Expenditures Panel Survey database who underwent medical management for CRS. Utility scores were calculated from responses to the EuroQol 5-Dimension instrument in both cohorts. Decision-tree analysis and a subsequent 10-state Markov model utilized published event probabilities as well as primary data from a large multisurgeon prospective outcomes study to calculate long-term costs and utility. The primary outcome measure was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for ESS vs medical therapy alone was $13,851.26 per QALY. The cost effectiveness acceptability curve demonstrated 85.84% and 98.69% certainty that the ESS strategy was the most cost-effective option at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $25,000 and $50,000 per QALY, respectively.
CONCLUSION: This study shows ESS to be a cost-effective intervention compared to medical therapy alone for the management of patients with CRS.
METHODS: The study design consisted of a microsimulation Markov decision-tree economic model with a 31-year time horizon. A cohort of 489 patients who underwent ESS for CRS were matched 1 to 1 with a cohort of 489 patients from the national Medical Expenditures Panel Survey database who underwent medical management for CRS. Utility scores were calculated from responses to the EuroQol 5-Dimension instrument in both cohorts. Decision-tree analysis and a subsequent 10-state Markov model utilized published event probabilities as well as primary data from a large multisurgeon prospective outcomes study to calculate long-term costs and utility. The primary outcome measure was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for ESS vs medical therapy alone was $13,851.26 per QALY. The cost effectiveness acceptability curve demonstrated 85.84% and 98.69% certainty that the ESS strategy was the most cost-effective option at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $25,000 and $50,000 per QALY, respectively.
CONCLUSION: This study shows ESS to be a cost-effective intervention compared to medical therapy alone for the management of patients with CRS.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma in adults.Gut 2024 April 17
Systemic lupus erythematosus.Lancet 2024 April 18
Should renin-angiotensin system inhibitors be held prior to major surgery?British Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 May
Ventilator Waveforms May Give Clues to Expiratory Muscle Activity.American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2024 April 25
Acute Kidney Injury and Electrolyte Imbalances Caused by Dapagliflozin Short-Term Use.Pharmaceuticals 2024 March 27
Colorectal polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2024.Endoscopy 2024 April 27
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app