Literature DB >> 16585125

A cost-utility analysis of hysterectomy, endometrial resection and ablation and medical therapy for menorrhagia.

Joyce H S You1, Daljit Singh Sahota, Pong MoYuen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Four types of treatment [hysterectomy, endometrial resection/ablation, levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) and oral medical therapy] are available for management of menorrhagia. The objective of this study was to compare the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained by these four treatment alternatives.
METHODS: A Markov model was designed to simulate the healthcare resource utilization and QALYs of the four treatment alternatives for patients presenting with menorrhagia over 5 years. Clinical inputs were estimated from literature, and the cost analysis was conducted from the perspective of healthcare provider in Hong Kong.
RESULTS: The base-case analysis showed that the hysterectomy group was the most effective (4.725 QALYs) alternative with the highest cost (USD6878, 1USD=7.8HKD). The incremental cost per additional QALY (ICER) gained by hysterectomy was USD23 500. The probability of extra surgery in the endometrial resection/ablation was an influential factor. Probabalistic sensitivity analysis of 10,000 simulations of the Monte Carlo model showed that the hysterectomy group gained higher number of QALYs than the LNG-IUS, oral medical treatment and endometrial resection/ablation groups, 99, 99 and 98% of the time, and it was more costly than the other three groups over 85% of the time.
CONCLUSIONS: Hysterectomy appears to be cost effective, with ICER less than USD50,000, for management of menorrhagia.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16585125     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/del088

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  8 in total

1.  Cost-utility analysis in China: differences and difficulties compared with developed countries.

Authors:  Liu Bao Peng; Chong Qing Tan; Xiao Min Wan; Wei Cui
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding.

Authors:  Rosalie J Fergusson; Magdalena Bofill Rodriguez; Anne Lethaby; Cindy Farquhar
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-08-29

Review 3.  Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System (52 mg) for Idiopathic Heavy Menstrual Bleeding: A Health Technology Assessment.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2016-11-01

4.  The hysterectomy story in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  Neela Mukhopadhaya; I T Manyonda
Journal:  J Midlife Health       Date:  2013-01

5.  Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system vs. usual medical treatment for menorrhagia: an economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Sabina Sanghera; Tracy Elizabeth Roberts; Pelham Barton; Emma Frew; Jane Daniels; Lee Middleton; Laura Gennard; Joe Kai; Janesh Kumar Gupta
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-17       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Venous intravasation as a complication and potential pitfall during hysterosalpingography: re-emerging study with a novel classification.

Authors:  Abdurrahim Dusak; Hatice E Soydinc; Hakan Onder; Faysal Ekinci; Neval Y Görük; Cihat Hamidi; Aslan Bilici
Journal:  J Clin Imaging Sci       Date:  2013-12-31

7.  Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding.

Authors:  Magdalena Bofill Rodriguez; Anne Lethaby; Rosalie J Fergusson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-02-23

8.  Progestogen-releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding.

Authors:  Magdalena Bofill Rodriguez; Anne Lethaby; Vanessa Jordan
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-06-12
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.