Prevention of adhesion formation after radical hysterectomy using a sodium hyaluronate-carboxymethylcellulose (HA-CMC) barrier: A cost-effectiveness analysis

Robert E. Bristow, Antonio Santillan-Gomez, Teresa P. Diaz-Montes, Ginger J. Gardner, Robert L. Giuntoli, Susan T. Peeler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an adhesion prevention strategy compared to routine care, in which no adhesion prevention measures are taken, through a decision analysis model in the clinical setting of patients undergoing radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy for Stage IB cervical cancer. Methods: A decision analysis model compared two strategies to manage the risk of adhesion-related morbidity following radical hysterectomy for Stage IB cervical cancer: (1) routine care with no adhesion prevention measures, and (2) the intervention strategy with a HA-CMC anti-adhesion barrier. The cost-effectiveness of each strategy was evaluated from the perspective of society and that of a third party payer. Results: From the perspective of society, the HA-CMC strategy had an overall cost per patient of $1932 and effectiveness of 7.901 QALYs and dominated the routine care strategy, which had a cost per patient of $3043 and effectiveness of 7.805 QALYs. From the perspective of a third party payer, the HA-CMC strategy had an overall cost per patient of $1247 and effectiveness of 7.987 QALYs and dominated the routine care strategy, which had a cost per patient of $1629 and effectiveness of 7.970 QALYs. A series of one-way sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the model. Conclusions: Under a conservative set of clinical and economic assumptions, an adhesion prevention strategy utilizing a HA-CMC barrier in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for Stage IB cervical cancer is cost-effective from both the perspective of society as a whole and that of a third party payer.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)739-746
Number of pages8
JournalGynecologic Oncology
Volume104
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2007

Fingerprint

Carboxymethylcellulose Sodium
Hyaluronic Acid
Hysterectomy
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Health Insurance Reimbursement
Costs and Cost Analysis
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
Decision Support Techniques
Lymph Node Excision
Economics
Morbidity

Keywords

  • Adhesion prevention
  • Cost-effectiveness
  • Radical hysterectomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Oncology

Cite this

Prevention of adhesion formation after radical hysterectomy using a sodium hyaluronate-carboxymethylcellulose (HA-CMC) barrier : A cost-effectiveness analysis. / Bristow, Robert E.; Santillan-Gomez, Antonio; Diaz-Montes, Teresa P.; Gardner, Ginger J.; Giuntoli, Robert L.; Peeler, Susan T.

In: Gynecologic Oncology, Vol. 104, No. 3, 03.2007, p. 739-746.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bristow, Robert E. ; Santillan-Gomez, Antonio ; Diaz-Montes, Teresa P. ; Gardner, Ginger J. ; Giuntoli, Robert L. ; Peeler, Susan T. / Prevention of adhesion formation after radical hysterectomy using a sodium hyaluronate-carboxymethylcellulose (HA-CMC) barrier : A cost-effectiveness analysis. In: Gynecologic Oncology. 2007 ; Vol. 104, No. 3. pp. 739-746.
@article{01867eeb0a3d4254b1f9e696393cbf0d,
title = "Prevention of adhesion formation after radical hysterectomy using a sodium hyaluronate-carboxymethylcellulose (HA-CMC) barrier: A cost-effectiveness analysis",
abstract = "Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an adhesion prevention strategy compared to routine care, in which no adhesion prevention measures are taken, through a decision analysis model in the clinical setting of patients undergoing radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy for Stage IB cervical cancer. Methods: A decision analysis model compared two strategies to manage the risk of adhesion-related morbidity following radical hysterectomy for Stage IB cervical cancer: (1) routine care with no adhesion prevention measures, and (2) the intervention strategy with a HA-CMC anti-adhesion barrier. The cost-effectiveness of each strategy was evaluated from the perspective of society and that of a third party payer. Results: From the perspective of society, the HA-CMC strategy had an overall cost per patient of $1932 and effectiveness of 7.901 QALYs and dominated the routine care strategy, which had a cost per patient of $3043 and effectiveness of 7.805 QALYs. From the perspective of a third party payer, the HA-CMC strategy had an overall cost per patient of $1247 and effectiveness of 7.987 QALYs and dominated the routine care strategy, which had a cost per patient of $1629 and effectiveness of 7.970 QALYs. A series of one-way sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the model. Conclusions: Under a conservative set of clinical and economic assumptions, an adhesion prevention strategy utilizing a HA-CMC barrier in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for Stage IB cervical cancer is cost-effective from both the perspective of society as a whole and that of a third party payer.",
keywords = "Adhesion prevention, Cost-effectiveness, Radical hysterectomy",
author = "Bristow, {Robert E.} and Antonio Santillan-Gomez and Diaz-Montes, {Teresa P.} and Gardner, {Ginger J.} and Giuntoli, {Robert L.} and Peeler, {Susan T.}",
year = "2007",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.09.029",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "104",
pages = "739--746",
journal = "Gynecologic Oncology",
issn = "0090-8258",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prevention of adhesion formation after radical hysterectomy using a sodium hyaluronate-carboxymethylcellulose (HA-CMC) barrier

T2 - A cost-effectiveness analysis

AU - Bristow, Robert E.

AU - Santillan-Gomez, Antonio

AU - Diaz-Montes, Teresa P.

AU - Gardner, Ginger J.

AU - Giuntoli, Robert L.

AU - Peeler, Susan T.

PY - 2007/3

Y1 - 2007/3

N2 - Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an adhesion prevention strategy compared to routine care, in which no adhesion prevention measures are taken, through a decision analysis model in the clinical setting of patients undergoing radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy for Stage IB cervical cancer. Methods: A decision analysis model compared two strategies to manage the risk of adhesion-related morbidity following radical hysterectomy for Stage IB cervical cancer: (1) routine care with no adhesion prevention measures, and (2) the intervention strategy with a HA-CMC anti-adhesion barrier. The cost-effectiveness of each strategy was evaluated from the perspective of society and that of a third party payer. Results: From the perspective of society, the HA-CMC strategy had an overall cost per patient of $1932 and effectiveness of 7.901 QALYs and dominated the routine care strategy, which had a cost per patient of $3043 and effectiveness of 7.805 QALYs. From the perspective of a third party payer, the HA-CMC strategy had an overall cost per patient of $1247 and effectiveness of 7.987 QALYs and dominated the routine care strategy, which had a cost per patient of $1629 and effectiveness of 7.970 QALYs. A series of one-way sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the model. Conclusions: Under a conservative set of clinical and economic assumptions, an adhesion prevention strategy utilizing a HA-CMC barrier in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for Stage IB cervical cancer is cost-effective from both the perspective of society as a whole and that of a third party payer.

AB - Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an adhesion prevention strategy compared to routine care, in which no adhesion prevention measures are taken, through a decision analysis model in the clinical setting of patients undergoing radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy for Stage IB cervical cancer. Methods: A decision analysis model compared two strategies to manage the risk of adhesion-related morbidity following radical hysterectomy for Stage IB cervical cancer: (1) routine care with no adhesion prevention measures, and (2) the intervention strategy with a HA-CMC anti-adhesion barrier. The cost-effectiveness of each strategy was evaluated from the perspective of society and that of a third party payer. Results: From the perspective of society, the HA-CMC strategy had an overall cost per patient of $1932 and effectiveness of 7.901 QALYs and dominated the routine care strategy, which had a cost per patient of $3043 and effectiveness of 7.805 QALYs. From the perspective of a third party payer, the HA-CMC strategy had an overall cost per patient of $1247 and effectiveness of 7.987 QALYs and dominated the routine care strategy, which had a cost per patient of $1629 and effectiveness of 7.970 QALYs. A series of one-way sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the model. Conclusions: Under a conservative set of clinical and economic assumptions, an adhesion prevention strategy utilizing a HA-CMC barrier in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for Stage IB cervical cancer is cost-effective from both the perspective of society as a whole and that of a third party payer.

KW - Adhesion prevention

KW - Cost-effectiveness

KW - Radical hysterectomy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33846911540&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33846911540&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.09.029

DO - 10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.09.029

M3 - Article

C2 - 17097723

AN - SCOPUS:33846911540

VL - 104

SP - 739

EP - 746

JO - Gynecologic Oncology

JF - Gynecologic Oncology

SN - 0090-8258

IS - 3

ER -