Trends in cost effectiveness analyses in orthopaedic surgery

被引:61
作者
Brauer, Carmen A.
Neumann, Peter J.
Rosen, Allison B.
机构
[1] Univ British Columbia, British Columbia Childrens Hosp, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada
[2] Tufts Univ New England Med Ctr, Inst Clin Res & Hlth Policy Studies, Boston, MA USA
[3] Univ Michigan, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Policy & Management, Univ Michigan Hlth Syst,Div Gen Med, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[4] Ann Arbor VA Med Ctr, Ctr Practice Management & Outcomes Res, Ann Arbor, MI USA
关键词
D O I
10.1097/BLO.0b013e31803372c9
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Worldwide, programs dealing with musculoskeletal health are required to set priorities and allocate resources within the constraint of limited funding. There is increasing pressure for medical technology assessment, which traditionally has involved evaluating safety and effectiveness, to also include consideration of cost effectiveness. We updated our database of orthopaedic cost-effectiveness studies, critically reviewed their methods, and examined trends over time. Current analyses have numerous shortcomings, such as the inclusion of relatively few studies, inconsistent methodologic approaches, and lack of transparency. The wide variation in cost-effectiveness ratios observed among current interventions suggests efficiency can be improved. Despite reimbursement authorities in many other countries formally considering cost-effectiveness when determining coverage of new technologies, Medicare has been resistant to considering costs of treatments. Regardless of this policy deficiency, conducting cost-effectiveness analyses represents a prudent step forward in illuminating the tradeoffs involved in difficult resource allocation decisions, and there is an urgent need to consider economic impact in future studies using standardized and transparent methods.
引用
收藏
页码:42 / 48
页数:7
相关论文
共 48 条
[1]  
Asch DA, 2003, AM J MANAG CARE, V9, P438
[2]   An off-the-shelf help list: A comprehensive catalog of preference scores from published cost-utility analyses [J].
Bell, CM ;
Chapman, RH ;
Stone, PW ;
Sandberg, EA ;
Neumann, PJ .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2001, 21 (04) :288-294
[3]  
Berger M L, 1999, Jt Comm J Qual Improv, V25, P455
[4]   Results of an economic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of enoxaparin, a low-molecular-weight heparin, versus warfarin for the prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis and associated long-term complications in total hip replacement surgery in the United States [J].
Botteman, MF ;
Caprini, J ;
Stephens, JM ;
Nadipelli, V ;
Bell, CF ;
Pashos, CL ;
Cohen, AT .
CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS, 2002, 24 (11) :1960-1986
[5]   Cost-utility analyses in orthopaedic surgery [J].
Brauer, CA ;
Rosen, AB ;
Olchanski, NV ;
Neumann, PJ .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2005, 87A (06) :1253-1259
[6]   Trends in the measurement of health utilities in published cost-utility analyses [J].
Brauer, Carmen A. ;
Rosen, Allison B. ;
Greenberg, Dan ;
Neumann, Peter J. .
VALUE IN HEALTH, 2006, 9 (04) :213-218
[7]  
Brecht JG, 2003, INT J CLIN PHARM RES, V23, P93
[8]   Cost effectiveness of tinzaparin sodium versus unfractionated heparin in the treatment of proximal deep vein thrombosis [J].
Caro, JJ ;
Getsios, D ;
Caro, I ;
O'Brien, JA .
PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2002, 20 (09) :593-602
[9]  
*CEA, CEA REG
[10]   When does quality-adjusting life-years matter in cost-effectiveness analysis? [J].
Chapman, RH ;
Berger, M ;
Weinstein, MC ;
Weeks, JC ;
Goldie, S ;
Neumann, PJ .
HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2004, 13 (05) :429-436