Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
1.
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg ; 84: 398-412, 2023 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37399660

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: One in seven women will develop breast cancer, making it the most common female cancer worldwide. Consequently, breast cancer-related treatment, including breast reconstruction, impacts societal costs. Autologous fat transfer (AFT) is a relatively new breast reconstruction technique; however, several surgeries are necessary. This study investigates if AFT with pre-expansion is more cost-effective than implant-based reconstruction (IBR). METHODS: Seven centers assigned patients randomly from 2015 to 2021 to evaluate costs and EQ-5D-5L quality-adjusted life years (QALY) of AFT vs. IBR at 12 months postoperative. Costs were calculated, including direct costs related to treatment and PROductivity and DISease Questionnaire, to estimate productivity loss (indirect costs). Sensitivity analyses were performed for 10- and 30 years to estimate costs for patients replacing or explanting their breast implants over time. RESULTS: A total of 152 women, of which 91 received AFT (mean age 49.3) and 80 IBR (mean age 49.1). The mean EQ-5D-5L QALY in the AFT group was 0.83, compared with the IBR group of 0.79. Total costs for AFT at 12 months postoperative were higher than IBR (incremental cost: €6763.59). Sensitivity analyses for 10- and 30-year scenarios showed mean incremental costs of respectively €2586.56 and €680.22. CONCLUSION: Mean EQ-5D-5L QALY and costs were higher for AFT over the first year after reconstruction. However, these costs were low; therefore, AFT was estimated to be more cost-effective over the 10- and 30-year period since no additional surgeries are necessary for this group. Larger cohorts are required to confirm AFT is more cost-effective in the long term.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Mammaplasty/methods , Surveys and Questionnaires , Breast/surgery , Quality of Life
2.
Eye (Lond) ; 37(15): 3137-3144, 2023 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36944711

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In most cases, glaucoma patients require long-term medical and/or surgical treatment. Preference studies investigate how different aspects of glaucoma management, such as health or process outcomes, are valued and herewith help stakeholders make care more responsive to patients' needs. As, to our knowledge, no overview of these studies is currently available, this study aims to systematically review and critically appraise these studies. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using keywords for stated-preference studies and glaucoma up to October 2021. Studies were included if they were original research and used a stated-preference methodology to investigate preferences in patients or healthcare professionals for different aspects of glaucoma management. Data were extracted and summarized. Furthermore, a quality appraisal of the included studies was performed using two validated checklists. RESULTS: The search yielded 1214 articles after removal of duplicates. Of those, 11 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Studies aimed to elicit preferences for glaucoma treatment (27%), glaucoma related health state valuation (36%), and services (36%) from the patient (91%) or ophthalmologists' perspective (9%). Altogether studies included 69 attributes. The majority of attributes were outcome related (62%), followed by process (32%) and cost attributes (6%). Outcome attributes (e.g., effectiveness) were most often of highest importance to the population. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review provides an up-to-date and critical review of stated-preference studies in the field of glaucoma, suggesting that patients have preferences and are willing to trade-off between characteristics, and revealed that outcome attributes are the most influential characteristics of glaucoma management.


Subject(s)
Glaucoma , Humans , Glaucoma/therapy , Patient Preference
4.
Br J Dermatol ; 183(4): 738-744, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31961446

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Actinic keratosis (AK) is a common premalignant skin condition that might have the ability to progress into squamous cell carcinoma. Due to the high incidence of AK, treatment of this disease significantly impacts healthcare spending. OBJECTIVES: To determine which commonly prescribed field-directed treatment is the most cost-effective, when comparing 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 5%, imiquimod (IMQ) 5%, ingenol mebutate (IM) 0·015% and methyl aminolaevulinate photodynamic therapy (MAL-PDT) for AK in the head and neck region. METHODS: We performed an economic evaluation from a healthcare perspective. Data were collected alongside a single-blinded, prospective, multicentre randomized controlled trial with 624 participants in the Netherlands. The outcome measure was expressed as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, which is the incremental costs per additional patient with ≥ 75% lesion reduction compared with baseline. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02281682. RESULTS: The trial showed that 5-FU was the most effective field treatment for AK in the head and neck region. Twelve months post-treatment, the total mean costs for 5-FU were significantly lower (€433) than the €728, €775 and €1621 for IMQ, IM and MAL-PDT, respectively. The results showed that 5-FU was a dominant cost-effective treatment (more effective and less expensive) compared with the other treatments, 12 months post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results, we consider 5-FU 5% cream as the first-choice treatment option for multiple AKs in the head and neck area. What's already known about this topic? Due to the increasing incidence of actinic keratosis (AK), the recommended treatment results in a considerable socioeconomic burden for (dermatological) healthcare. Although cost-effectiveness modelling studies have been performed in which different treatments for AK were compared, a prospective clinical trial comparing four frequently prescribed treatments on effectiveness and resource consumption within a time horizon of 12 months has never been conducted. What does this study add? This is the first study examining the cost-effectiveness of 5-fluorouracil 5% cream, imiquimod 5% cream, ingenol mebutate 0·015% gel and methyl aminolaevulinate photodynamic therapy, with data collected in a randomized controlled trial over a time horizon of 12 months. We found that 5-fluorouracil was a dominant cost-effective treatment (more effective and less costly), based on data from the Netherlands. Linked Comment: Steeb et al. Br J Dermatol 2020; 183:612.


Subject(s)
Keratosis, Actinic , Photochemotherapy , Aminolevulinic Acid/analogs & derivatives , Aminolevulinic Acid/therapeutic use , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Diterpenes , Fluorouracil/therapeutic use , Humans , Imiquimod/therapeutic use , Keratosis, Actinic/drug therapy , Netherlands , Photosensitizing Agents/therapeutic use , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
5.
Trials ; 20(1): 759, 2019 Dec 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31870414

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the Dutch breast cancer screening program, women recalled with a BI-RADS 0 score are referred for additional imaging, while those with BI-RADS 4/5 scores are also directed to an outpatient breast clinic. Approximately six out of ten women are recalled without being diagnosed with a malignancy. However, these recalls require additional imaging and doctor visits, which result in patient anxiety and increased health care costs. Conventional types of imaging used for additional imaging are full-field digital mammography and tomosynthesis. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography has proved to have higher sensitivity and specificity than conventional imaging in women recalled from screening. Therefore, the aim is to study if CESM instead of conventional imaging is a more accurate, patient-friendly, and cost-effective strategy in the work-up of women recalled from breast cancer screening. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial will be conducted at four centers and will include 528 patients recalled for suspicious breast lesions from the Dutch breast cancer screening program. Participants are randomized in two groups: (1) standard care using conventional breast imaging techniques as initial imaging after recall versus (2) work-up primarily based on CESM. Written informed consent will be collected prior to study inclusion. The primary outcome is the diagnostic accuracy for detection of breast cancer. Secondary outcomes are numbers of additional diagnostic exams, days until final diagnosis, health care costs, and experienced patient anxiety. DISCUSSION: Based on previously published retrospective studies, we expect to demonstrate in this prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial, that using CESM as a primary work-up tool in women recalled from breast cancer screening is a more accurate, cost-effective, and patient-friendly strategy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register, NL6413/NTR6589. Registered on 6 July, 2017.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Mammography/methods , Anxiety/psychology , Biopsy, Fine-Needle , Biopsy, Large-Core Needle , Breast Neoplasms/blood supply , Contrast Media , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Early Detection of Cancer/economics , Early Detection of Cancer/psychology , Female , Health Care Costs , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Mammography/economics , Mammography/psychology , Netherlands , Ultrasonography, Mammary
8.
Eur Radiol ; 25(5): 1464-70, 2015 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25591748

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether mandatory imaging is an effective strategy in suspected appendicitis for reducing unnecessary surgery and costs. METHODS: In 2010, guidelines were implemented in The Netherlands recommending the mandatory use of preoperative imaging to confirm/refute clinically suspected appendicitis. This retrospective study included 1,556 consecutive patients with clinically suspected appendicitis in 2008-2009 (756 patients/group I) and 2011-2012 (800 patients/group II). Imaging use (none/US/CT and/or MRI) was recorded. Additional parameters were: complications, medical costs, surgical and histopathological findings. The primary study endpoint was the number of unnecessary surgeries before and after guideline implementation. RESULTS: After clinical examination by a surgeon, 509/756 patients in group I and 540/800 patients in group II were still suspected of having appendicitis. In group I, 58.5% received preoperative imaging (42% US/12.8% CT/3.7% both), compared with 98.7% after the guidelines (61.6% US/4.4% CT/ 32.6% both). The percentage of unnecessary surgeries before the guidelines was 22.9%. After implementation, it dropped significantly to 6.2% (p<0.001). The surgical complication rate dropped from 19.9% to 14.2%. The average cost-per-patient decreased by 594 from 2,482 to 1,888 (CL:-1081; -143). CONCLUSION: Increased use of imaging in the diagnostic work-up of patients with clinically suspected appendicitis reduced the rate of negative appendectomies, surgical complications and costs. KEY POINTS: • The 2010 Dutch guidelines recommend mandatory imaging in the work-up of appendicitis. • This led to a considerable increase in the use of preoperative imaging. • Mandatory imaging led to reduction in unnecessary surgeries and surgical complications. • Use of mandatory imaging seems to reduce health care costs.


Subject(s)
Appendectomy/economics , Appendicitis/diagnostic imaging , Preoperative Care/economics , Preoperative Care/methods , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Unnecessary Procedures/economics , Acute Disease , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Appendicitis/economics , Appendicitis/surgery , Appendix/diagnostic imaging , Appendix/surgery , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multimodal Imaging , Netherlands , Retrospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/economics , Ultrasonography , Young Adult
9.
Br J Dermatol ; 171(6): 1501-7, 2014 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24749843

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A recent noninferiority randomized trial showed that in terms of clinical effectiveness imiquimod was superior and topical fluorouracil noninferior to methylaminolaevulinate photodynamic therapy (MAL-PDT) for treatment of superficial basal-cell carcinoma (sBCC). Although it was expected that MAL-PDT would be more costly than either cream, a full cost-effectiveness analysis is necessary to determine the balance between effectiveness and costs. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether imiquimod or topical fluorouracil are cost-effective treatments for sBCC compared with MAL-PDT. METHODS: An economic evaluation was performed from a healthcare perspective. Data on resource use and costs were collected alongside the randomized clinical trial. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was expressed as the incremental costs per additional patient free of tumour recurrence. RESULTS: At 12 months follow-up, the total mean costs for MAL-PDT were €680, for imiquimod cream €526 and for topical fluorouracil cream €388. Both imiquimod and topical fluorouracil were cost-effective treatments compared with MAL-PDT. Comparing costs and effectiveness of both creams led to a incremental investment of €4451 to achieve an additional patient free of tumour recurrence. The acceptability curve showed that, for a threshold value of €4451, the probability of imiquimod being more cost-effective than topical fluorouracil was 50%. CONCLUSION: Based on the 12 months follow-up results, imiquimod and topical fluorouracil cream are more cost-effective than MAL-PDT for treatment of sBCC. Hence, substituting MAL-PDT with either imiquimod or topical fluorouracil results in cost savings; these savings will be larger for topical fluorouracil. Long-term follow-up effectiveness data are necessary to confirm the cost-effectiveness of imiquimod vs. topical 5-fluorouracil cream.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Basal Cell/drug therapy , Photochemotherapy/economics , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy , Administration, Cutaneous , Aminolevulinic Acid/analogs & derivatives , Aminolevulinic Acid/economics , Aminolevulinic Acid/therapeutic use , Aminoquinolines/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/economics , Carcinoma, Basal Cell/economics , Cost Savings , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Fluorouracil/administration & dosage , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Imiquimod , Photochemotherapy/methods , Photosensitizing Agents/economics , Photosensitizing Agents/therapeutic use , Skin Neoplasms/economics
10.
Epilepsy Behav ; 31: 102-9, 2014 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24389020

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Diagnosing epilepsy is a lengthy and burdensome process for patients and their family. Although the need for a more patient-centered approach in clinical practice is widely acknowledged, empirical evidence regarding patient preferences for diagnostic modalities in epilepsy is missing. The objectives of this study were 1) to identify to what extent important attributes of diagnostic procedures in epilepsy affect preferences for a procedure, 2) to determine the relative importance of these attributes, and 3) to calculate overall utility scores for routine electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) recordings. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was performed to determine patients' preferences, which involved presentation of pairwise choice tasks regarding hypothetical scenarios. Scenarios varied along six attributes: "way of measuring brain activity", "duration", "freedom of movement", "travel time", "type of additional examination", and "chance of additional examination". Choice tasks were constructed using a statistically efficient design, and the questionnaire contained 15 unique unlabeled choice tasks. Mixed multinomial logistic regression was used to estimate patients' preferences. RESULTS: A total of 289 questionnaires were included in the analysis. McFadden's pseudo R(2) showed a model fit of 0.28, and all attributes were statistically significant. Heterogeneity in preferences was present for all attributes. "Freedom of movement" and "Chance of additional examination" were perceived as the most important attributes. Overall utility scores did not substantially differ between routine EEG and MEG. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the identified attributes are important in determining patients' preference for epilepsy diagnostics. It can be concluded that MEG is not necessarily more patient-friendly than a routine EEG in primary diagnostics and, regarding additional diagnostics, patients have a strong preference for long-term 24-h EEG over EEG after sleep deprivation. Furthermore, barring substantial heterogeneity within the parameters in mind, our study suggests that it is important to take individual preferences into account in medical decision-making.


Subject(s)
Choice Behavior/physiology , Epilepsy/diagnosis , Epilepsy/psychology , Patient Preference , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Electroencephalography , Female , Humans , Logistic Models , Magnetoencephalography , Male , Middle Aged , Surveys and Questionnaires , Time Factors , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...