Literature DB >> 12598799

Cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, and cost-benefit studies in rheumatology: a review of the literature, 2001-2002.

Mallik N Tella1, Joseph Feinglass, Rowland W Chang.   

Abstract

Economic analyses of prevention and treatment interventions in rheumatology are potentially powerful tools for evaluating many complex decisions facing clinical and public policy makers. Cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, and cost-benefit analyses allow for the assessment of the trade-offs between expended resources and expected health benefits. This review describes 12 cost-effectiveness analyses done in the past year. Each relates to a different intervention for a variety of rheumatologic conditions including osteoporosis, rheumatoid arthritis, the use of cyclooxygenase-II inhibitors, infected total joint replacements, back pain, and Lyme disease. While cost-effectiveness analyses of the use of the new biologic agents in rheumatoid arthritis have been presented at national meetings, these have yet to be published. Proper use of cost-effectiveness analysis could provide valuable evidence about treatment decisions for clinical and public policy makers in rheumatology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12598799     DOI: 10.1097/00002281-200303000-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Opin Rheumatol        ISSN: 1040-8711            Impact factor:   5.006


  3 in total

1.  Measuring utilities by the time trade-off method in Tunisian rheumatoid arthritis patients.

Authors:  Ismail Bejia; Kamel Ben Salem; Mongi Touzi; Naceur Bergaoui
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2005-05-18       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 2.  Efficacy, tolerability and cost effectiveness of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and biologic agents in rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Michael T Nurmohamed; Ben A C Dijkmans
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 3.  The economic burden of Lyme disease and the cost-effectiveness of Lyme disease interventions: A scoping review.

Authors:  Stephen Mac; Sara R da Silva; Beate Sander
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-04       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.