Literature DB >> 22278164

[What can medicine expect from health economics?].

E Bismarck1, B J Schmitz-Dräger, O Schöffski.   

Abstract

Medicine has changed dramatically in the past ten decades thanks to the introduction of innovative diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. However, besides the unmistakable advances achieved in medicine, the costs of all health care systems have risen dramatically. In contrast to the escalation in expenditures, only moderate gains in proceeds have been accomplished. This situation requires that future financial resources be judiciously expended. The field of health economics has set as its goal the analysis of medical measures in terms of costs and benefits to be able to provide information on these parameters to those involved in the public health sector. The emerging problems are diverse and extend from assessment of effects and side effects to difficulties in standardizing analytical procedures and comparing results between different health care systems.In the context of this manuscript an attempt has been made to illustrate the methodological approaches to health economics based on current issues in the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer. This contribution intends to motivate stakeholders to view health economics as a tool to promote improvements in medical care and not as a means to regulating and rationing medical measures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22278164     DOI: 10.1007/s00120-011-2778-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urologe A        ISSN: 0340-2592            Impact factor:   0.639


  23 in total

1.  Cost comparison between watchful waiting with active surveillance and active treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Anthony T Corcoran; Pamela B Peele; Ronald M Benoit
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2010-04-09       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  Prostate cancer screening strategies with re-screening interval determined by individual baseline prostate-specific antigen values are cost-effective.

Authors:  T Kobayashi; R Goto; K Ito; K Mitsumori
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2007-04-03       Impact factor: 4.424

3.  Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial.

Authors:  Gerald L Andriole; E David Crawford; Robert L Grubb; Saundra S Buys; David Chia; Timothy R Church; Mona N Fouad; Edward P Gelmann; Paul A Kvale; Douglas J Reding; Joel L Weissfeld; Lance A Yokochi; Barbara O'Brien; Jonathan D Clapp; Joshua M Rathmell; Thomas L Riley; Richard B Hayes; Barnett S Kramer; Grant Izmirlian; Anthony B Miller; Paul F Pinsky; Philip C Prorok; John K Gohagan; Christine D Berg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-03-18       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 4.  Economic evaluation of prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen.

Authors:  Tomoaki Imamura; Hideo Yasunaga
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 3.369

5.  Docetaxel and estramustine compared with mitoxantrone and prednisone for advanced refractory prostate cancer.

Authors:  Daniel P Petrylak; Catherine M Tangen; Maha H A Hussain; Primo N Lara; Jeffrey A Jones; Mary Ellen Taplin; Patrick A Burch; Donna Berry; Carol Moinpour; Manish Kohli; Mitchell C Benson; Eric J Small; Derek Raghavan; E David Crawford
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-10-07       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Docetaxel plus prednisone or mitoxantrone plus prednisone for advanced prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ian F Tannock; Ronald de Wit; William R Berry; Jozsef Horti; Anna Pluzanska; Kim N Chi; Stephane Oudard; Christine Théodore; Nicholas D James; Ingela Turesson; Mark A Rosenthal; Mario A Eisenberger
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-10-07       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Laurence Klotz; Liying Zhang; Adam Lam; Robert Nam; Alexandre Mamedov; Andrew Loblaw
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-11-16       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Docetaxel plus prednisone or mitoxantrone plus prednisone for advanced prostate cancer: updated survival in the TAX 327 study.

Authors:  Dominik R Berthold; Gregory R Pond; Freidele Soban; Ronald de Wit; Mario Eisenberger; Ian F Tannock
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-01-10       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 9.  Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Authors:  Mia Djulbegovic; Rebecca J Beyth; Molly M Neuberger; Taryn L Stoffs; Johannes Vieweg; Benjamin Djulbegovic; Philipp Dahm
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-09-14

10.  Overdetection, overtreatment and costs in prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer.

Authors:  E A M Heijnsdijk; A der Kinderen; E M Wever; G Draisma; M J Roobol; H J de Koning
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.