Danielle M Gillard1, Jeffrey P Harris2. 1. University of California, San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla. 2. Division of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla.
Abstract
Importance: Otosclerosis can be managed through surgical treatment, such as stapedectomy, or through hearing amplification with hearing aids. To our knowledge, there has been no cost-effectiveness analysis of these 2 treatment methods. Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of stapedectomy vs hearing aid use for the treatment of otosclerosis. Design and Setting: In this cost-effectiveness analysis, a decision tree was built to model the treatment choices for otosclerosis. The tree was run as a Markov model of a case patient aged 30 years. The model spanned the patient's lifetime to determine total costs of management of otosclerosis with stapedectomy or hearing aids. Cost-effectiveness was measured using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, with a willingness to pay of $50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) considered cost-effective. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed for all variables. A 2-way sensitivity analysis was performed for the cost of stapedectomy vs the cost of hearing aids. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the likelihood that stapedectomy would be cost-effective across a range of model inputs. Interventions: Stapedectomy vs hearing aid use. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary objective of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of stapedectomy vs hearing aids in the treatment of otosclerosis. The secondary objectives were to determine which factors are associated with the cost-effectiveness of the interventions. Results: Stapedectomy had an estimated lifetime cost of $19 417.95, while hearing aids had an average lifetime cost of $16 439.94. Stapedectomy also had a benefit of 16.58 QALYs, and hearing aids had a benefit of 15.82 QALYs. Stapedectomy increases lifetime costs by $2978.01, with a benefit of 0.76 QALYs compared with hearing aids. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for stapedectomy is $3918.43 per QALY. The model was sensitive to the cost of stapedectomy and the cost of stapedectomy revision surgery. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that stapedectomy was cost-effective compared with hearing aids 99.98% of the time. Conclusions and Relevance: Stapedectomy appears to be a cost-effective option for treating otosclerosis compared with hearing aid use, from the patient perspective.
Importance: Otosclerosis can be managed through surgical treatment, such as stapedectomy, or through hearing amplification with hearing aids. To our knowledge, there has been no cost-effectiveness analysis of these 2 treatment methods. Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of stapedectomy vs hearing aid use for the treatment of otosclerosis. Design and Setting: In this cost-effectiveness analysis, a decision tree was built to model the treatment choices for otosclerosis. The tree was run as a Markov model of a case patient aged 30 years. The model spanned the patient's lifetime to determine total costs of management of otosclerosis with stapedectomy or hearing aids. Cost-effectiveness was measured using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, with a willingness to pay of $50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) considered cost-effective. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed for all variables. A 2-way sensitivity analysis was performed for the cost of stapedectomy vs the cost of hearing aids. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the likelihood that stapedectomy would be cost-effective across a range of model inputs. Interventions: Stapedectomy vs hearing aid use. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary objective of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of stapedectomy vs hearing aids in the treatment of otosclerosis. The secondary objectives were to determine which factors are associated with the cost-effectiveness of the interventions. Results: Stapedectomy had an estimated lifetime cost of $19 417.95, while hearing aids had an average lifetime cost of $16 439.94. Stapedectomy also had a benefit of 16.58 QALYs, and hearing aids had a benefit of 15.82 QALYs. Stapedectomy increases lifetime costs by $2978.01, with a benefit of 0.76 QALYs compared with hearing aids. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for stapedectomy is $3918.43 per QALY. The model was sensitive to the cost of stapedectomy and the cost of stapedectomy revision surgery. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that stapedectomy was cost-effective compared with hearing aids 99.98% of the time. Conclusions and Relevance: Stapedectomy appears to be a cost-effective option for treating otosclerosis compared with hearing aid use, from the patient perspective.
Authors: Alfonso Scarpa; Pasquale Marra; Massimo Ralli; Pasquale Viola; Federico Maria Gioacchini; Giuseppe Chiarella; Francesco Antonio Salzano; Pietro De Luca; Filippo Ricciardiello; Claudia Cassandro; Grazia Maria Corbi Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2022-07-20 Impact factor: 3.236
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: Sophie Bonnafous; Jennifer Margier; Sophie Bartier; Romain Tournegros; Stéphane Tringali; Maxime Fieux Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-02-01
Authors: Douglas Backous; Byung Yoon Choi; Rafael Jaramillo; Kelvin Kong; Thomas Lenarz; Jaydip Ray; Alok Thakar; Myrthe K S Hol Journal: J Int Adv Otol Date: 2022-07 Impact factor: 1.316