Cargando…
Investigating the 7-Year Cost-Effectiveness of Single-Level Cervical Disc Replacement Compared to Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion
STUDY DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis. OBJECTIVES: To determine the 7-year cost-effectiveness of cervical disc replacement (CDR) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). METHODS: We analyzed 7-year Short Form-36 Health Survey data collected from the Prestige Cervical Disc investigatio...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5810898/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29456913 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568217726283 |
Sumario: | STUDY DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis. OBJECTIVES: To determine the 7-year cost-effectiveness of cervical disc replacement (CDR) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). METHODS: We analyzed 7-year Short Form-36 Health Survey data collected from the Prestige Cervical Disc investigational device exemption study (IDE). The SF-6D algorithm was used to convert this data into health state utilities. Costs were calculated from the payer perspective, and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to represent effectiveness. A Markov transition-state model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of single-level CDR versus ACDF, and a Monte Carlo simulation was performed to assess the probabilistic sensitivity of the model. RESULTS: CDR generated a 7-year cost of $172 989 compared to a 7-year cost of $143 714 for ACDF. CDR generated 4.53 QALYs compared to 3.85 QALYs generated by ACDF. The cost-effectiveness ratio of CDR was $38 247/QALY, while the cost-effectiveness ratio of ACDF was $37 325/QALY. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CDR was $43 522/QALY, under the willingness to pay threshold of $50 000/QALY. Our probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated CDR would be chosen 56% of the time based on 10 000 simulations. CONCLUSIONS: Single-level CDR and ACDF were both cost-effective strategies at 7 years for treating degenerative conditions of the cervical spine. Both the Markov simulation and the Monte Carlo simulation demonstrate CDR to be the more cost-effective strategy at 7 years. Continued analysis of IDE data should be performed to validate long-term cost-effectiveness of these treatment strategies. |
---|