Literature DB >> 9611905

A cost-utility analysis of abdominal hysterectomy versus transcervical endometrial resection for the surgical treatment of menorrhagia.

M Sculpher1.   

Abstract

Menorrhagia, or heavy regular menstrual bleeding, represents a major health burden to women. Trials comparing abdominal hysterectomy (AH) with transcervical resection of the endometrium (TCRE) for the condition have shown that, although the duration and severity of convalescence is less with TCRE, AH produces a permanent solution to heavy bleeding while TCRE fails in a proportion of women by 2 years. However, by 2 years, TCRE costs only 71% that of AH. This paper presents a cost-utility analysis to assess which procedure is more cost-effective overall. Under most plausible parameter values and on the basis of health state values elicited from a sample of women with menorrhagia, AH is likely to be considered more cost-effective than TCRE if purchasers are willing to pay an additional cost of at least 6,500 Pounds per extra quality-adjusted life-year generated by AH.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9611905     DOI: 10.1017/s0266462300012277

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care        ISSN: 0266-4623            Impact factor:   2.188


  9 in total

1.  Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding.

Authors:  Rosalie J Fergusson; Magdalena Bofill Rodriguez; Anne Lethaby; Cindy Farquhar
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-08-29

Review 2.  Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System (52 mg) for Idiopathic Heavy Menstrual Bleeding: A Health Technology Assessment.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2016-11-01

Review 3.  Evaluating Cost-effectiveness of Interventions That Affect Fertility and Childbearing: How Health Effects Are Measured Matters.

Authors:  Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Margaret L Brandeau
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 2.749

Review 4.  Hysterectomy, endometrial ablation, and levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) for treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding: cost effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  T E Roberts; A Tsourapas; L J Middleton; R Champaneria; J P Daniels; K G Cooper; S Bhattacharya; P M Barton
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2011-04-26

5.  Cost effectiveness of endometrial ablation with the NovaSure(®) system versus other global ablation modalities and hysterectomy for treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding: US commercial and Medicaid payer perspectives.

Authors:  Jeffrey D Miller; Gregory M Lenhart; Machaon M Bonafede; Cindy M Basinski; Andrea S Lukes; Kathleen A Troeger
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2015-01-06

6.  Cost-Effectiveness of Global Endometrial Ablation vs. Hysterectomy for Treatment of Abnormal Uterine Bleeding: US Commercial and Medicaid Payer Perspectives.

Authors:  Jeffrey D Miller; Gregory M Lenhart; Machaon M Bonafede; Andrea S Lukes; Shannon K Laughlin-Tommaso
Journal:  Popul Health Manag       Date:  2015-02-25       Impact factor: 2.459

7.  Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding.

Authors:  Magdalena Bofill Rodriguez; Anne Lethaby; Rosalie J Fergusson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-02-23

8.  Optimal management of high-risk T1G3 bladder cancer: a decision analysis.

Authors:  Girish S Kulkarni; Antonio Finelli; Neil E Fleshner; Michael A S Jewett; Steven R Lopushinsky; Shabbir M H Alibhai
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 11.069

9.  Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound surgery for treatment of uterine fibroids.

Authors:  H Zowall; J A Cairns; C Brewer; D L Lamping; W M W Gedroyc; L Regan
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 6.531

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.