OBJECTIVE: Hearing aids are the principal tool for rehabilitation of hearing loss, one of the most prevalent impairments among elderly adults, but cost-utility ratings for hearing aid use are limited. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING AND PATIENTS: A multistate Markov model was constructed to model 50- to 80-year-old patients moving between states, including normal hearing, mild, moderate, or severe hearing loss. Parameters assigned in the model are partly derived from the Medline source (1966-2005) and partly from data on hearing-impaired elders (n = 96) in a tertiary care center in Taiwan. To address uncertainty, most of the parameters were specified by distributions, rather than base-case values. A probabilistic approach with Monte Carlo simulations was performed to produce an acceptability curve, showing the probabilities of being cost-effective given threshold values of willingness to pay (WTP). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hearing-related quality-adjusted life-years and cost in US dollars and Euros. RESULTS: The incremental costs for gaining an additional hearing-related quality-adjusted life-years in women and men were US $13,615 (Euro 10,826) and 9,702 (Euro 7,715), respectively. The probability of being cost-effective increased to 53% in women and 65% in men given a WTP of US $12,000 (Euro 9,542). The probabilities of being cost-effective to reach plateau were 67% for women and 78% for men given a WTP of US $20,000 (Euro 15,904). CONCLUSION: By modeling different degrees of hearing loss with a multistate model, hearing aid use was demonstrated to be a cost-effective strategy to rehabilitate the hearing-impaired elderly. These results can assist policy makers in allocating health resources appropriately and effectively.
OBJECTIVE: Hearing aids are the principal tool for rehabilitation of hearing loss, one of the most prevalent impairments among elderly adults, but cost-utility ratings for hearing aid use are limited. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING AND PATIENTS: A multistate Markov model was constructed to model 50- to 80-year-old patients moving between states, including normal hearing, mild, moderate, or severe hearing loss. Parameters assigned in the model are partly derived from the Medline source (1966-2005) and partly from data on hearing-impaired elders (n = 96) in a tertiary care center in Taiwan. To address uncertainty, most of the parameters were specified by distributions, rather than base-case values. A probabilistic approach with Monte Carlo simulations was performed to produce an acceptability curve, showing the probabilities of being cost-effective given threshold values of willingness to pay (WTP). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hearing-related quality-adjusted life-years and cost in US dollars and Euros. RESULTS: The incremental costs for gaining an additional hearing-related quality-adjusted life-years in women and men were US $13,615 (Euro 10,826) and 9,702 (Euro 7,715), respectively. The probability of being cost-effective increased to 53% in women and 65% in men given a WTP of US $12,000 (Euro 9,542). The probabilities of being cost-effective to reach plateau were 67% for women and 78% for men given a WTP of US $20,000 (Euro 15,904). CONCLUSION: By modeling different degrees of hearing loss with a multistate model, hearing aid use was demonstrated to be a cost-effective strategy to rehabilitate the hearing-impaired elderly. These results can assist policy makers in allocating health resources appropriately and effectively.
Authors: Ethan D Borre; Mohamed M Diab; Austin Ayer; Gloria Zhang; Susan D Emmett; Debara L Tucci; Blake S Wilson; Kamaria Kaalund; Osondu Ogbuoji; Gillian D Sanders Journal: EClinicalMedicine Date: 2021-05-08
Authors: Palvinder Kaur; Sheue Lih Chong; Palvannan Kannapiran; W-S Kelvin Teo; Charis Ng Wei Ling; Chiang Win Weichen; Gan Ruling; Lee Sing Yin; Tang Ying Leng; Soo Ying Pei; Then Tze Kang; Lim Zhen Han; Lin Peizhen; Lynne Lim Hsueh Yee; Pradeep Paul George Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2020-12-01 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Evie C Landry; Mirre Scholte; Matthew P Su; Yvette Horstink; Rishi Mandavia; Maroeska M Rovers; Anne G M Schilder Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2022-03-04 Impact factor: 4.677