Comparison of analytic approaches for the economic evaluation of new technologies alongside multicenter clinical trials

American Heart Journal

Volumn 145, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 452-458

  Taira, Deborah A ^a,c   Seto, Todd B ^a,d   Siegrist, Richard ^b   Cosgrove, Roberta ^a   Berezin, Ronna ^a   Cohen, David J ^a,b,e  

^a HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c Hawaii Medical Service Association   (United States)

^d QUEEN S MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; CATHETERIZATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEART MUSCLE REVASCULARIZATION; HOSPITAL COST; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 0037348974     PISSN: 00028703     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1067/mhj.2003.3     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Kissik WL. Medicine's dilemmas: infinite needs versus finite resources. New Haven (Conn): Yale University Press; 1994.
2. Granata AV, Hillman AL. Competing practice guidelines: using cost-effectiveness analysis to make optimal decisions. Ann Intern Med 1998;128:56-63.
3. Gafni A, Birch S. Guidelines for the adoption of new technologies: a prescription for uncontrolled growth in expenditures and how to avoid the problem. Can Med Assoc J 1993;148:913-7.
4. Eisenberg JM. Clinical economics: a guide to the economic analysis of clinical practice. JAMA 1989;262:2879-86.
5. Udvarhelyi S, Golditz GA, Rai A, et al. Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses in the medical literature: are the methods being used correctly? Ann Intern Med 1992;116:238-44.
6. Balas EA, Kretschmeer RAC, Gnan W, et al. Interpreting cost analyses of clinical interventions. JAMA 1998;279:54-7.
7. Mark DB, Hlatky MA, Califf RM, et al. Cost effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy with tissue plasminogen activator as compared with streptokinase for acute myocardial infarction. N Eng J Med 1995; 332:1418-24.
8. Eckman MH, Falk RH, Pauker SG. Cost-effectiveness of therapies for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Arch Intern Med 1998;158:1669-77.
9. Lave JR, Pashos CL, Anderson GF, et al. Costing medical care: using Medicare administrative data. Med Care 1994;32:JS77-89.
10. Reeder GS, Bailey KR, Gersh BJ, et al. Cost comparison of immediate angioplasty versus thrombolysis followed by conservative therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a randomized prospective trial. Mayo Clin Proc 1994;69:5-12.
11. Hemenway D, Sherman H, Mudge GH, et al. Comparative costs versus symptomatic and employment benefits of medical and surgical treatment of stable angina pectoris. Med Care 1985;23:133-41.
12. Jang GC, Block PC, Copwley MJ, et al. Relative cost of cornary angioplasty and bypass surgery in a one-vessel disease model. Am J Cardiol 1984;53:52-5C.
13. Hlatky MA, Rogers WJ, Johnstone I, et al. Medical care costs and quality of life after randomization to coronary angioplasty or coronary bypass surgery: Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). New Engl J Med 1997;336:92-9.
14. Mark DB, Cowper PA, Berkowitz SD, et al. Economic assessment of low-molecular-weight heparin (Enoxaparin) versus unfractionated heparin in acute coronary syndrome patients: results from the ESSENCE randomized trial. Circulation 1998;97:1702-7.
15. Mark DB, Talley JD, Topol EJ, et al. Economic assessment of plateletglycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition for prevention of ischemic complications of high-risk coronary angioplasty. Circulation 1996; 94:629-35.
16. Weintraub WS, Mauldin PD, Becker E, et al. A comparison of the costs of and quality of life after coronary angioplasty or coronary surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease: results from the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST). Circulation 1995; 92:2831-40.
17. Baim DS, Cutlip DE, Sharma SK, et al. Final results of the Balloon vs Optimal Atherectomy Trial (BOAT). Circulation 1998;97:322-31.
18. Baim DS, Cutlip DE, Medei M, et al. Acute 30-day and late clinical events in the randomized parallel-group comparison of the ACS Multi-Link coronary stent system and the Palmaz-Schatz stent [abstract]. Circulation 1997;96:1-593
19. Kuntz RE, Bain DS, Cohn DJ, et al. A randomized prospective multicenter trial comparing vacuum thrombectomy to intracoronary urokinase for coronary and vein graft thrombus: results of the Vein Graft Angiojet Study (VEGAS 2). Am J Cardiol 2002;89:326-30.
20. Hsiao WC, Brawn P, Kelly NL, et al. Results, potential effects, and implementation issues of the resource-based relative value scale. JAMA 1988;260:2429-38.
21. Stine R. An introduction to bootstrap methods: examples and ideas. In: Fox J, Long JS, editors. Modern methods of data analysis. Newbury Park (Calif): Sage Publications; 1990. p. 353-73.
22. Wilcoxon F. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics 1945;1:80-3.
23. Evans RG. Manufacturing consensus, marketing truth: guidelines for economic evaluation. Ann Intern Med 1995;123:59-60.
24. Finkler SA. The distinction between cost and charges. Ann Intern Med 1982:96:102-9.
25. Drummond MF, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1987.
26. Shwartz M, Young DW, Siegrist R. The ratio of costs to charges: how good a basis for estimating costs? Inquiry 1995;32:476-81.
27. Blackmore CC, Magid DJ. Methodologic evaluation of the radiology cost-effectiveness literature. Radiology 1997;203:87-91.