Intussusception in children: Cost-effectiveness of ultrasound vs diagnostic contrast enema

Journal of Pediatric Surgery

Volumn 46, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 1099-1105

  Bucher, Brian T ^a   Hall, Bruce L ^b   Warner, Brad W ^a   Keller, Martin S ^a  

^a WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST LOUIS   (United States)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness; Decision analysis; Intussusception; Radiation induced malignancy

Indexed keywords

ENEMA;

ARTICLE; BLADDER CANCER; CANCER RISK; CASE REPORT; CHILD; CHILDHOOD DISEASE; COHORT ANALYSIS; COLON CANCER; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; INTUSSUSCEPTION; LEUKEMIA; LIVER CANCER; MALE; OVARY CANCER; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; QUALITY OF LIFE; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADIATION INDUCED NEOPLASM; STOMACH CANCER;

BARIUM SULFATE; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; COHORT STUDIES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ENEMA; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTUSSUSCEPTION; MALE; MARKOV CHAINS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, DOPPLER;

EID: 79959311559     PISSN: 00223468     EISSN: 15315037     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2011.03.034     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Kaiser AD, Applegate KE, Ladd AP. Current success in the treatment of intussusception in children. Surgery 2007;142:469-75.
2. Ignacio RC, Fallat ME. Ashcraft's pediatric surgery. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2010.
3. Kuppermann N, O'Dea T, Pinckney L, et al. Predictors of intussusception in young children. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2000;154:250-5. (Pubitemid 30131905)
4. Daneman A, Navarro O. Intussusception. Part 2: an update on the evolution of management. Pediatr Radiol 2004;34:97-108.
5. Monson RR, Cleaver JE, Abrams HL, et al. Committee to assess health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII phase 2. Washington, DC: National Research Council; 2006.
6. Daneman A, Navarro O. Intussusception. Part 1: a review of diagnostic approaches. Pediatr Radiol 2003;33:79-85.
7. Wan MJ, Krahn M, Ungar WJ, et al. Acute appendicitis in young children: cost-effectiveness of US versus CT in diagnosis - a Markov decision analytic model. Radiology 2009;250:378-86.
8. Tsevat J, Cook EF, Green ML, et al. Health values of the seriously ill. SUPPORT investigators. Ann Intern Med 1995;122:514-20.
9. Mittmann N, Trakas K, Risebrough N, et al. Utility scores for chronic conditions in a community-dwelling population. Pharmacoeconomics 1999;15:369-76. (Pubitemid 29190028)
10. Heenan SD, Kyriou J, Fitzgerald M, et al. Effective dose at pneumatic reduction of paediatric intussusception. Clin Radiol 2000;55:811-6. (Pubitemid 32054634)
11. Harrington L, Connolly B, Hu X, et al. Ultrasonographic and clinical predictors of intussusception. J Pediatr 1998;132:836-9. (Pubitemid 28232937)
12. Shanbhogue RL, Hussain SM, Meradji M, et al. Ultrasonography is accurate enough for the diagnosis of intussusception. J Pediatr Surg 1994;29:324-7 [discussion 327-8].
13. Verschelden P, Filiatrault D, Garel L, et al. Intussusception in children: reliability of US in diagnosis - a prospective study. Radiology 1992;184:741-4.
14. Arias E. United States life tables, 2004. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2007;56:1-39.
15. Reis LA, Eisner MP, Kosary CL, et al.: SEER cancer statistics review, 1975-2000.
16. King Jr JT, Tsevat J, Lave JR, et al. Willingness to pay for a qualityadjusted life year: implications for societal health care resource allocation. Med Decis Making 2005;25:667-77. (Pubitemid 41667135)