Literature DB >> 15538248

Cost-effectiveness of medical management strategies for nephrolithiasis.

Yair Lotan1, Jeffrey A Cadeddu, Claus G Roerhborn, Charles Y C Pak, Margaret S Pearle.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We evaluated the cost-effectiveness and stone recurrence rates of common management strategies in stone formers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision tree model was created to compare the costs of 6 medical treatment strategies, namely dietary measures alone (conservative), empiric drug treatment (empiric), or directed drug therapy based on simple or comprehensive metabolic evaluation. The model assumed cost accrual for evaluation, medications, emergency treatment and surgery for stone recurrence. We determined recurrence rates, medical evaluation sensitivity and the risk reduction of medical treatments from the literature and the costs of surgery, emergency room and medical evaluation at our county hospital. Drug costs were obtained from 2 national pharmacy chains.
RESULTS: In first time stone formers conservative treatment was the least costly strategy and it yielded a stone formation rate of 0.07 stones per patient yearly. In recurrent stone formers conservative treatment was less costly than drug treatments but it was associated with a higher stone recurrence rate (0.3 stones per patient yearly). The remaining drug treatments were more costly than conservative treatment ($885 to 1,187 vs $258 yearly) but they further decreased recurrence rates by 60% to 86%. Modified simple medical evaluation and management (SMEM), that is drug treatment in all patients after simple evaluation) was slightly more costly than empiric treatment and minimally more effective. Comprehensive evaluation and treatment offered no advantage in cost or efficacy over empiric treatment or modified SMEM.
CONCLUSIONS: In first time stone formers conservative therapy is cost-effective and efficacious. In recurrent stone formers conservative therapy is unsatisfactory despite low cost because of a high recurrence rate. Modified SMEM and empiric therapy yield the same cost and efficacy as treatments that follow comprehensive evaluation. However, modified SMEM may be advantageous because it offers useful additional medical information.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15538248     DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000141498.11720.20

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  27 in total

Review 1.  Pharmacotherapy of urolithiasis: evidence from clinical trials.

Authors:  Orson W Moe; Margaret S Pearle; Khashayar Sakhaee
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 10.612

2.  Longitudinal evaluation of the SF-36 quality of life questionnaire in patients with kidney stones.

Authors:  Chester J Donnally; Amit Gupta; Karim Bensalah; Altug Tuncel; Jay Raman; Margaret S Pearle; Yair Lotan
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2010-10-06

3.  Metabolic testing of the first-time calcium oxalate stone former: Is it indicated? No.

Authors:  Hassan Razvi
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Arguments for a comprehensive metabolic evaluation of the first-time stone former.

Authors:  Ryan F Paterson
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.862

5.  Climate-related increase in the prevalence of urolithiasis in the United States.

Authors:  Tom H Brikowski; Yair Lotan; Margaret S Pearle
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2008-07-14       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Update on the evaluation of repeated stone formers.

Authors:  Adam O Kadlec; Thomas M Turk
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.092

7.  Antihypertensive medication and risk of kidney stones: a Canadian wake-up call.

Authors:  Daniel G Fuster
Journal:  Hypertens Res       Date:  2017-04-06       Impact factor: 3.872

8.  Determinants of health-related quality of life for patients after urinary lithotripsy: ureteroscopic vs. shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Shuzo Hamamoto; Rei Unno; Kazumi Taguchi; Taku Naiki; Ryosuke Ando; Atsushi Okada; Takaaki Inoue; Shinsuke Okada; Mostafa AbdelRazek; Kenjiro Kohri; Takahiro Yasui
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 3.436

9.  Feasibility of a Telemedicine-Administered, Pharmacist-Staffed, Protocol-Driven, Multicenter Program for Kidney Stone Prevention in a Large Integrated Health Care System: Results of a Pilot Program.

Authors:  Mark E Gasparini; Toby W Chang; Mark St Lezin; John E Skerry; Andy Chan; Krishna A Ramaswamy
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2019-11-01

10.  Relationship Between Spontaneous Passage Rates of Ureteral Stones Less Than 8 mm and Serum C-Reactive Protein Levels and Neutrophil Percentages.

Authors:  Chang Hyun Park; Ji Yong Ha; Choal Hee Park; Chun Il Kim; Kwang Se Kim; Byung Hoon Kim
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2013-09-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.