Literature DB >> 22985375

Is surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy cost-effective? A cost-utility analysis based on data from the AOSpine North America prospective CSM study.

Michael G Fehlings1, Neilank K Jha, Stephanie M Hewson, Eric M Massicotte, Branko Kopjar, Sukhvinder Kalsi-Ryan.   

Abstract

OBJECT: Surgical intervention for appropriately selected patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) has demonstrated favorable outcomes. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of this type of surgery in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.
METHODS: As part of a larger prospective multicenter study, the direct costs of medical treatment for 70 patients undergoing surgery for CSM at a single institution in Canada were retrospectively obtained from the hospital expenses database and physician reimbursement data. Utilities were estimated on the entire sample of 278 subjects enrolled in the multicenter study using SF-6D-derived utilities from 12- and 24-month SF-36v2 follow-up information. Costs were analyzed from the payer perspective. A 10-year horizon with 3% discounting was applied to health-utilities estimates. Sensitivity analysis was performed by varying utility gain by 20%.
RESULTS: The SF-6D utility gain was 0.0734 (95% CI 0.0557-0.0912, p < 0.01) at 12 months and remained unchanged at 24 months. The 10-year discounted QALY gain was 0.64. Direct costs of medical treatment were estimated at an average of CaD $21,066. The estimated cost-utility ratio was CaD $32,916 per QALY gained. The sensitivity analysis showed a range of CaD $27,326-$40,988 per QALY gained. These estimates are within the limits for medical procedures that have an acceptable cost-utility ratio.
CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment for CSM is associated with significant improvement in health utilities as measured by the SF-6D. The direct cost of medical treatment per QALY gained places this form of treatment within the category deemed by payers to be cost-effective.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22985375     DOI: 10.3171/2012.6.AOSPINE111069

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine        ISSN: 1547-5646


  20 in total

1.  Propensity-matched Analysis of Outcomes and Hospital Charges for Anterior Versus Posterior Cervical Fusion for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy.

Authors:  Joseph E Tanenbaum; Daniel Lubelski; Benjamin P Rosenbaum; Edward C Benzel; Thomas E Mroz
Journal:  Clin Spine Surg       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 1.876

2.  Surgical site infections following operative management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy: prevalence, predictors of occurence, and influence on peri-operative outcomes.

Authors:  C M Jalai; N Worley; G W Poorman; D L Cruz; S Vira; P G Passias
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-03-17       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Quality of life outcomes following surgery for patients with coexistent cervical stenosis and multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Daniel Lubelski; Matthew D Alvin; Michael Silverstein; Nilgun Senol; Kalil G Abdullah; Edward C Benzel; Thomas E Mroz
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-05-15       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Utilization of a novel digital measurement tool for quantitative assessment of upper extremity motor dexterity: a controlled pilot study.

Authors:  Ruth Getachew; Sunghoon I Lee; Jon A Kimball; Andrew Y Yew; Derek S Lu; Charles H Li; Jordan H Garst; Nima Ghalehsari; Brian H Paak; Mehrdad Razaghy; Marie Espinal; Arsha Ostowari; Amir A Ghavamrezaii; Sahar Pourtaheri; Irene Wu; Majid Sarrafzadeh; Daniel C Lu
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2014-08-13       Impact factor: 4.262

5.  Does age affect surgical outcomes in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy? Results from the prospective multicenter AOSpine International study on 479 patients.

Authors:  Hiroaki Nakashima; Lindsay A Tetreault; Narihito Nagoshi; Aria Nouri; Branko Kopjar; Paul M Arnold; Ronald Bartels; Helton Defino; Shashank Kale; Qiang Zhou; Michael G Fehlings
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2015-09-29       Impact factor: 10.154

6.  Socioeconomic and regional differences in the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Sheri K Palejwala; Anand I Rughani; G Michael Lemole; Travis M Dumont
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2017-05-26

Review 7.  The reporting of study and population characteristics in degenerative cervical myelopathy: A systematic review.

Authors:  Benjamin M Davies; M McHugh; A Elgheriani; Angelos G Kolias; Lindsay Tetreault; Peter J A Hutchinson; Michael G Fehlings; Mark R N Kotter
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Comparing Utility Scores in Common Spinal Radiculopathies: Results of a Prospective Valuation Study.

Authors:  Nikhil R Nayak; James H Stephen; Kalil G Abdullah; Sherman C Stein; Neil R Malhotra
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2015-09-01

9.  A Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Patients With Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Recommendations for Patients With Mild, Moderate, and Severe Disease and Nonmyelopathic Patients With Evidence of Cord Compression.

Authors:  Michael G Fehlings; Lindsay A Tetreault; K Daniel Riew; James W Middleton; Bizhan Aarabi; Paul M Arnold; Darrel S Brodke; Anthony S Burns; Simon Carette; Robert Chen; Kazuhiro Chiba; Joseph R Dettori; Julio C Furlan; James S Harrop; Langston T Holly; Sukhvinder Kalsi-Ryan; Mark Kotter; Brian K Kwon; Allan R Martin; James Milligan; Hiroaki Nakashima; Narihito Nagoshi; John Rhee; Anoushka Singh; Andrea C Skelly; Sumeet Sodhi; Jefferson R Wilson; Albert Yee; Jeffrey C Wang
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2017-09-05

Review 10.  Current Diagnosis and Management of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy.

Authors:  Joshua Bakhsheshian; Vivek A Mehta; John C Liu
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2017-05-31
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.