Cost-utility analysis of cochlear implants in Korea using different measures of utility

被引:23
|
作者
Lee, Hoo-Yeon
Park, Eun-Cheol
Kim, Han Joong
Choi, Jae-Young
Kim, Hee-Nam
机构
[1] Yonsei Univ, Grad Sch Publ Hlth, Seoul 120749, South Korea
[2] Yonsei Univ, Natl Canc Ctr, Seoul 120749, South Korea
[3] Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Dept Prevent Med, Seoul 120749, South Korea
[4] Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Dept Otolaryngol, Seoul 120749, South Korea
关键词
cochlear implant; cost-utility analysis; quality-adjusted life year;
D O I
10.1080/00016480500525213
中图分类号
R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100213 ;
摘要
Conclusions. All cost-utility ratios obtained using the various measures of utility except quality well-being (QWB) were below $25 000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Therefore, treatment of post-lingual deaf adults with cochlear implants improves the quality of life at a reasonable direct cost and appears to produce net savings for Korean society. Objectives. To determine the quality of life and the cost consequences of cochlear implants for deaf adults. Patients and methods. We performed a cost-utility analysis using data from 11 post-lingual deaf adults who had received cochlear implants between 1990 and 2002 in Seoul, Korea. The average age of the participants was 49.6 years. The main outcome was the direct cost per QALY calculated using the visual analog scale (VAS), health utility index (HUI), EuroQol (EQ-5D) measure and QWB measure. Costs and utility were discounted 3% annually. Results. Recipients used implants for an average of 5.6 years. The mean VAS, HUI, EQ-5D, and QWB score increased by 0.33 (from 0.27 before implantation to 0.60 at survey), 0.36 (0.29 to 0.65), 0.26 (0.52 to 0.78), and 0.16 (0.45 to 0.61), respectively. The discounted direct cost was $22 320, which yielded a cost-utility ratio of $19 223 per QALY using VAS, $17 387 per QALY using HUI, $24 604 per QALY using EQ-5D, and $40 474 per QALY using QWB.
引用
收藏
页码:817 / 823
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Cost-utility of cochlear implants a societal perspective analysis
    Barlev, A
    Hay, JW
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2004, 7 (03) : 259 - 259
  • [2] Cost-utility analysis of the cochlear implant in children
    Cheng, AK
    Rubin, HR
    Powe, NR
    Mellon, NK
    Francis, HW
    Niparko, JK
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2000, 284 (07): : 850 - 856
  • [3] A cost-utility analysis of pediatric cochlear implantation
    O'Neill, C
    O'Donoghue, GM
    Archbold, SM
    Normand, C
    [J]. LARYNGOSCOPE, 2000, 110 (01): : 156 - 160
  • [4] Cost-utility analysis of pediatric cochlear implantation
    O'Neill, C
    [J]. LARYNGOSCOPE, 2000, 110 (07): : 1239 - 1239
  • [5] A cost-utility analysis of cochlear implants for single sided deafness in adults and children in the Netherlands
    van Lieshout, Chris
    Abraham, Katharina
    Smit, Adriana L.
    Frederix, Geert W. J.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2024, 19 (08):
  • [6] A cost-utility scenario analysis of bilateral cochlear implantation
    Summerfield, AQ
    Marshall, DH
    Barton, GR
    Bloor, KE
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD & NECK SURGERY, 2002, 128 (11) : 1255 - 1262
  • [7] Cost-Utility Analysis of Cochlear Implantation in Australian Adults
    Foteff, Chris
    Kennedy, Steven
    Milton, Abul Hasnat
    Deger, Melike
    Payk, Florian
    Sanderson, Georgina
    [J]. OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2016, 37 (05) : 454 - 461
  • [8] The impact of using different indirect utility measures on cost-utility analysis in rheumatoid arthritis: All QALYs are not equal.
    Marra, CA
    Guh, DP
    Woolcott, JC
    Esdaile, JM
    Anis, AH
    [J]. ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM, 2003, 48 (09): : S402 - S402
  • [9] Cost-utility analysis
    Brown, GC
    Brown, MM
    Sharma, S
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2001, 134 (07) : 625 - 626
  • [10] COST-UTILITY ANALYSIS
    NICHOLLS, A
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1993, 307 (6913): : 1213 - 1213