Literature DB >> 26193812

A cost-effectiveness analysis of long-term intermittent catheterisation with hydrophilic and uncoated catheters.

J F Clark1, S J Mealing1, D A Scott1, L C Vogel2, A Krassioukov3, M Spinelli4, P Bagi5, J-J Wyndaele6.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysisObjective:To establish a model to investigate the cost effectiveness for people with spinal cord injury (SCI), from a lifetime perspective, for the usage of two different single-use catheter designs: hydrophilic-coated (HC) and uncoated (UC). The model includes the long-term sequelae of impaired renal function and urinary tract infection (UTI).
SETTING: Analysis based on a UK perspective.
METHODS: A probabilistic Markov decision model was constructed, to compare lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years, taking renal and UTI health states into consideration, as well as other catheter-related events. UTI event rates for the primary data set were based on data from hospital settings to ensure controlled and accurate reporting. A sensitivity analysis was applied to evaluate best- and worst-case scenarios.
RESULTS: The model predicts that a 36-year-old SCI patient with chronic urinary retention will live an additional 1.4 years if using HC catheters compared with UC catheters, at an incremental cost of £2100. Moreover, the lifetime number of UTI events will be reduced by 16%. All best- and worst-case estimates were within the UK threshold of being cost effective.
CONCLUSION: The use of HC catheters for intermittent catheterisation in SCI patients is highly cost effective. The outcome is consistent irrespective of whether UTI data are collected in hospital or community settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26193812     DOI: 10.1038/sc.2015.117

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spinal Cord        ISSN: 1362-4393            Impact factor:   2.772


  7 in total

1.  Intermittent catheterization with a prelubricated catheter in spinal cord injured patients: a prospective randomized crossover study.

Authors:  A Giannantoni; S M Di Stasi; G Scivoletto; G Virgili; S Dolci; M Porena
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Intermittent catheterization with a hydrophilic-coated catheter delays urinary tract infections in acute spinal cord injury: a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial.

Authors:  Diana D Cardenas; Katherine N Moore; Amy Dannels-McClure; William M Scelza; Daniel E Graves; Monifa Brooks; Anna Karina Busch
Journal:  PM R       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 2.298

3.  Intermittent catheterisation with hydrophilic-coated catheters (SpeediCath) reduces the risk of clinical urinary tract infection in spinal cord injured patients: a prospective randomised parallel comparative trial.

Authors:  D J M K De Ridder; K Everaert; L García Fernández; J V Forner Valero; A Borau Durán; M L Jauregui Abrisqueta; M G Ventura; A Rodriguez Sotillo
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2005-08-15       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 4.  Intermittent catheterisation for long-term bladder management (abridged cochrane review).

Authors:  Jacqui A Prieto; Catherine Murphy; Katherine N Moore; Mandy J Fader
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2015-06-05       Impact factor: 2.696

Review 5.  Complications of intermittent catheterization: their prevention and treatment.

Authors:  J J Wyndaele
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 2.772

6.  Hydrophilic catheters versus noncoated catheters for reducing the incidence of urinary tract infections: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Diana D Cardenas; Jeanne M Hoffman
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.966

Review 7.  Intermittent self catheterisation with hydrophilic, gel reservoir, and non-coated catheters: a systematic review and cost effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Sarah L Bermingham; Sarah Hodgkinson; Sue Wright; Ellie Hayter; Julian Spinks; Carol Pellowe
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2013-01-08
  7 in total
  13 in total

Review 1.  Clean intermittent catheterization revisited.

Authors:  Eliza Lamin; Diane K Newman
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2016-03-08       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  Canadian Urological Association Best Practice Report: Catheter use.

Authors:  Lysanne Campeau; Samer Shamout; Richard J Baverstock; Kevin V Carlson; Dean S Elterman; Duane R Hickling; Stephen S Steele; Blayne Welk
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 3.  The management of neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction after spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Jean-Jacques Wyndaele
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2016-10-25       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 4.  Catheters for intermittent catheterization: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Donghui Ye; Yuntian Chen; Zhongyu Jian; Banghua Liao; Xi Jin; Liyuan Xiang; Hong Li; Kunjie Wang
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2021-04-28       Impact factor: 2.772

Review 5.  Outcome comparison of different approaches to self-intermittent catheterization in neurogenic patients: a systematic review.

Authors:  S Shamout; X Biardeau; J Corcos; L Campeau
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2017-01-24       Impact factor: 2.772

Review 6.  Intermittent catheter techniques, strategies and designs for managing long-term bladder conditions.

Authors:  Jacqui A Prieto; Catherine L Murphy; Fiona Stewart; Mandy Fader
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-10-26

7.  Intermittent Catheters for Chronic Urinary Retention: A Health Technology Assessment.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2019-02-19

Review 8.  Healthcare resource consumption for intermittent urinary catheterisation: cost-effectiveness of hydrophilic catheters and budget impact analyses.

Authors:  Carla Rognoni; Rosanna Tarricone
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-01-17       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 9.  Intermittent catheterisation with hydrophilic and non-hydrophilic urinary catheters: systematic literature review and meta-analyses.

Authors:  Carla Rognoni; Rosanna Tarricone
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 2.264

10.  Can hydrophilic coated catheters be beneficial for the public healthcare system in Brazil? - A cost-effectiveness analysis in patients with spinal cord injuries.

Authors:  José Carlos Truzzi; Vanessa Teich; Camila Pepe
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2018 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.