Cost-effectiveness analysis of open colposuspension versus laparoscopic colposuspension in the treatment of urodynamic stress incontinence

BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 113, Issue 9, 2006, Pages 1014-1022

  Dumville, J C ^a   Manca, A ^a   Kitchener, H C ^b   Smith, A R B ^c   Nelson, L ^b   Torgerson, D J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^c ST MARY S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Colposuspension; Cost effectiveness; Costs; Economics; Laparoscopic; Open; QALYs; Urinary stress incontinence

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COLPOSUSPENSION; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LAPAROSCOPIC COLPOSUSPENSION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OPEN COLPOSUSPENSION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STRESS INCONTINENCE; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; URODYNAMICS;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH RESOURCES; HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; LENGTH OF STAY; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; URINARY INCONTINENCE, STRESS; VAGINA;

EID: 33748182396     PISSN: 14700328     EISSN: 14710528     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01036.x     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Kitchener HC, Dunn G, Lawton V, Reid F, Nelson L, Smith ARB on behalf of the COLPO study group. Laparoscopic versus open colposuspension-results of a prospective randomised controlled trial. BJOG (in press).
2. Lapitan MC, Cody DJ, Grant AM. Open retropubic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;1:CD002912.
3. Kung RC, Lie K, Lee P, Drutz HP. The cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic versus abdominal Burch procedures in women with urinary stress incontinence. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 1996;3:537-44.
4. Loveridge K, Malouf A, Kennedy C, Edgington A, Lam A. Laparoscopic colposuspension. Is it cost-effective? Surg Endosc 1997;11:762-5.
5. Kohli N, Jacobs PA, Sze EH, Roat TW, Karram MM. Open compared with laparoscopic approach to Burch colposuspension: a cost analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90:411-15.
6. Brown LC, Epstein D, Manca A, Beard JD, Powell JT, Greenhalgh RM. The UK Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) trials: design, methodology and progress. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2004;27:372-81.
7. NICE. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence, 2004 [www.nice.org.uk]. Accessed 7 July 2006.
8. The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA). The Health Service Database 2002-03. Croydon, UK: CIFPA, 2003.
9. Sculpher M, Manca A, Abbott J, Fountain J, Mason S, Garry R. Cost effectiveness analysis of laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with standard hysterectomy: results from a randomised trial. BMJ 2004;328:134.
10. Review body for Nursing Staff Midwives, Health Visitors and Professionals Allied to Medicine. Report 2003. London: HMSO, 2003.
11. Netten A, Dennett J, Knight J. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care. Canterbury, UK: PSSRU, University of Kent at Canterbury, 2003.
12. Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. British National Formulary. Number 44 (September). London: British Medical Association and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, 2002.
13. Kind P. The EuroQol instrument: an index of health-related quality of life. In: Spiker B, editor. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven; 1996. p. 191-201.
14. Kind P, Hardman G, Macran S. UK Population Norms for EQ-5D. Centre for Health Economics. Discussion Paper 172. York, UK: Centre for Health Economics, University of York, 1999.
15. Kind P, Dolan P, Gudex C, Williams A. Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. BMJ 1998;317:601.
16. Manca A, Hawkins N, Sculpher MJ. Estimating mean QALYs in trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis: the importance of controlling for baseline utility. Health Econ 2005;14:487-96.
17. Luce BR, O'Hagan A. A Primer on Bayesian Statistics in Health Economics and Outcomes Research. London: Medtap, 2003.
18. UK BEAM Trial Team. United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomised trial: cost effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care. BMJ 2004;329:1381.
19. Petit C, Maccario J. A Bayesian analysis of pharmacoeconomic data from a clinical trial on schizophrenia. Stat Med 2003;22:1025-39.
20. Cooper NJ, Sutton AJ, Abrams KR. Decision analytical economic modelling within a Bayesian framework: application to prophylactic antibiotics use for caesarean section. Stat Methods Med Res 2002;11:491-512.
21. Fryback DG, Chinnis JO Jr, Ulvila JW. Bayesian cost-effectiveness analysis. An example using the GUSTO trial. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2001;17:83-97.
22. Spiegelhalter DJ, Thomas A, Best NG. WinBUGS Version 1.4 User Manual. Cambridge, UK: MRC Biostatistics Unit, 1999.
23. Van Hout BA, Al MJ, Gordon GS, Rutten FFH. Costs, effects and C/E ratios alongside a clinical trial. Health Econ 1994;3:309-19.
24. Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Representing uncertainty: the role of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Health Econ 2001;10:779-87.
25. Fenwick E, O'Brien BJ, Briggs A. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves - facts, fallacies and frequently asked questions. Health Econ 2004;13:405-15.
26. Matthew JNS, Altman D, Campbell MJ. Analysis of serial measurements in medical research. BMJ 1990;300:230-5.
27. Fatthy H, El Hao M, Samaha I, Abdallah K. Modified Burch colposuspension: laparoscopy versus laparotomy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2001;8:99-106.
28. Su TH, Wang KG, Hsu CY, Wei HJ, Hong BK. Prospective comparison of laparoscopic and traditional colposuspensions in the treatment of genuine stress incontinence. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1997;76:576-82.
29. Ankardal M, Ekerydh A, Crafoord K, Milsom I, Stjerndahl JH, Engh ME. A randomised trial comparing open Burch colposuspension using sutures with laparoscopic colposuspension using mesh and staples in women with stress urinary incontinence. BJOG 2004;111:974-81.
30. Cheon WC, Mak JH, Liu JY. Prospective randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and open colposuspension. Hong Kong Med J 2003;9:10-14.
31. Ustun Y, Engin-Ustun Y, Gungor M, Tezcan S. Randomized comparison of Burch urethropexy procedures concomitant with gynecologic operations. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2005;59:19-23.
32. Raftery J. NICE: faster access to modern treatments? Analysis of guidance on health technologies. BMJ 2001;32:1300-3.
33. Manca A, Sculpher MJ, Ward K, Hilton P. A cost-utility analysis of tension-free vaginal tape versus colposuspension for primary urodynamic stress incontinence. BJOG 2003;110:255-62.
34. Burton G. A three year prospective randomised urodynamic study comparing open and laparoscopic colposuspension. Neurourol Urodyn 1997;16:353-4.
35. Neumayer L, Giobbie-Hurder A, Jonasson O, Fitzgibbons R Jr, Dunlop D, Gibbs J, et al. Open mesh versus laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia. N Engl JMed 2004;350:1819-27.
36. Cody J, Wyness L, Wallace S, Glazener C, Kilonzo M, Stearns S, et al. Systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of tension-free vaginal tape for treatment of urinary stress incontinence. Health Technol Assess 2003;7:iii, 1-189.
37. Kilonzo M, Vale L, Stearns SC, Grant A, Cody J, Glazener CM, et al. Cost effectiveness of tension-free vaginal tape for the surgical management of female stress incontinence. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2004;20:455-63.
38. Valpas A, Kivelä A, Penttinen J, Kujansuu E, Haarala M, Nilsson CG. Tension-free vaginal tape and laparoscopic mesh colposuspension for stress urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 2004;104:42-9.
39. Fidela M, Paraiso R, Walters MD, Karram MM, Barber MD. Laparoscopic Burch colposuspension versus tension-free vaginal tape: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 2004;104:1249-58.