OBJECTIVE: To undertake a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing conservative management, surgery and radiosurgery for treating small-to-medium (1-20 mm)-sized vestibular schwannomas. DESIGN: Model-based economic evaluation using individual-level data from a Birmingham-based longitudinal patient database and from published sources. Both a decision tree and state-transition (Markov) model were developed, from an National Health Service (NHS) perspective. Sensitivity analyses were also carried out. SETTING: Secondary care treatment for patients with small-to-medium-sized vestibular schwannomas. PARTICIPANTS: Three hypothetical cohorts of adult patients receiving conservative management, radiosurgery or surgery treatment, aged 58 years as starting age within model. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost-effectiveness based on cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). RESULTS: Conservative management is the preferred strategy for the treatment of small-to-medium-sized vestibular schwannomas. Conservative management is both cheaper (-£ 722 and -£ 2764) and more effective (0.136 and 0.554 quality-adjusted life years) than both radiosurgery and surgery, respectively. A conservative strategy can therefore be considered as highly cost-effective. This result is sensitive to the assumed quality-of-life parameters in the model. Sensitivity analysis suggests that the probability of a conservative strategy being the most cost-effective approach compared with surgery and radiosurgery at a willingness to pay of £ 20 000/quality-adjusted life year gained is 80% and 55%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A conservative approach is the preferred strategy for treatment of small-to-medium vestibular schwannomas. This result is sensitive to quality-of-life values used in the analysis. More research is required to assess the impact of treatment upon patients' health-related quality of life over time.
OBJECTIVE: To undertake a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing conservative management, surgery and radiosurgery for treating small-to-medium (1-20 mm)-sized vestibular schwannomas. DESIGN: Model-based economic evaluation using individual-level data from a Birmingham-based longitudinal patient database and from published sources. Both a decision tree and state-transition (Markov) model were developed, from an National Health Service (NHS) perspective. Sensitivity analyses were also carried out. SETTING: Secondary care treatment for patients with small-to-medium-sized vestibular schwannomas. PARTICIPANTS: Three hypothetical cohorts of adult patients receiving conservative management, radiosurgery or surgery treatment, aged 58 years as starting age within model. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost-effectiveness based on cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). RESULTS: Conservative management is the preferred strategy for the treatment of small-to-medium-sized vestibular schwannomas. Conservative management is both cheaper (-£ 722 and -£ 2764) and more effective (0.136 and 0.554 quality-adjusted life years) than both radiosurgery and surgery, respectively. A conservative strategy can therefore be considered as highly cost-effective. This result is sensitive to the assumed quality-of-life parameters in the model. Sensitivity analysis suggests that the probability of a conservative strategy being the most cost-effective approach compared with surgery and radiosurgery at a willingness to pay of £ 20 000/quality-adjusted life year gained is 80% and 55%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A conservative approach is the preferred strategy for treatment of small-to-medium vestibular schwannomas. This result is sensitive to quality-of-life values used in the analysis. More research is required to assess the impact of treatment upon patients' health-related quality of life over time.
Authors: Hyo Jung Kim; Seong Ho Park; Ji Soo Kim; Ja Won Koo; Chae Yong Kim; Young Hoon Kim; Jung Ho Han Journal: J Clin Neurol Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 3.077
Authors: Stan R W Wijn; Mayke A Hentschel; Andy J Beynon; Henricus P M Kunst; Maroeska M Rovers Journal: Clin Otolaryngol Date: 2021-11-24 Impact factor: 2.729
Authors: Mirre Scholte; Mayke A Hentschel; Gerjon Hannink; Henricus P M Kunst; Stefan C Steens; Maroeska M Rovers; Janneke P C Grutters Journal: Clin Otolaryngol Date: 2019-04-11 Impact factor: 2.597
Authors: Dominique Valérie Clarence de Jel; Ernst J Smid; Tristan P C van Doormaal; Hans G X M Thomeer Journal: J Int Adv Otol Date: 2021-09 Impact factor: 1.017