Cargando…
Cost-effectiveness-analysis of ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization compared with landmark method: a decision-analytic model
BACKGROUND: Ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization is a commonly used alternative to the conventional landmark method. Because from the German perspective, the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound guidance is unclear, this study examined the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound guidance vers...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6456944/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30967124 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-019-0719-5 |
_version_ | 1783409832155414528 |
---|---|
author | Seleznova, Yana Brass, Patrick Hellmich, Martin Stock, Stephanie Müller, Dirk |
author_facet | Seleznova, Yana Brass, Patrick Hellmich, Martin Stock, Stephanie Müller, Dirk |
author_sort | Seleznova, Yana |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization is a commonly used alternative to the conventional landmark method. Because from the German perspective, the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound guidance is unclear, this study examined the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound guidance versus the landmark method for adults undergoing a central venous catheterization. METHODS: A decision-tree based model was built to estimate the costs of averted catheter-related complications. Clinical data (e.g. arterial puncture, failed attempts) were obtained from a Cochrane review and a randomized controlled trial, whilst information about cost parameters were taken from a German hospital of maximum care. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the German Statutory Health Insurance. Results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. To assess the parameter uncertainty, several sensitivity analyses were performed (deterministic, probabilistic and with regard to the model structure). RESULTS: Our analysis revealed that ultrasound guidance resulted in fewer complications per person (0.04 versus 0.17 for the landmark method) and was less expensive (€51 versus €230 for the landmark method). Results were robust to changes in the model parameters and in the model structure. Whilst our model population reflected approximately 49% of adults undergoing a central venous catheterization cannulation per year, structural sensitivity analyses (e.g. extending the study cohort to patients at higher baseline risk of complications, pediatric patients, or using real-time/indirect catheterization) indicated the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound guidance for a broader spectrum of patients. The results should be interpreted by considering the assumptions (e.g. target population) and approximations (e.g. cost parameters) underpinning the model. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization averts more catheter-related complications and may save the resources of the German Statutory Health Insurance compared with landmark method. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12871-019-0719-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6456944 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64569442019-04-19 Cost-effectiveness-analysis of ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization compared with landmark method: a decision-analytic model Seleznova, Yana Brass, Patrick Hellmich, Martin Stock, Stephanie Müller, Dirk BMC Anesthesiol Research Article BACKGROUND: Ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization is a commonly used alternative to the conventional landmark method. Because from the German perspective, the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound guidance is unclear, this study examined the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound guidance versus the landmark method for adults undergoing a central venous catheterization. METHODS: A decision-tree based model was built to estimate the costs of averted catheter-related complications. Clinical data (e.g. arterial puncture, failed attempts) were obtained from a Cochrane review and a randomized controlled trial, whilst information about cost parameters were taken from a German hospital of maximum care. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the German Statutory Health Insurance. Results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. To assess the parameter uncertainty, several sensitivity analyses were performed (deterministic, probabilistic and with regard to the model structure). RESULTS: Our analysis revealed that ultrasound guidance resulted in fewer complications per person (0.04 versus 0.17 for the landmark method) and was less expensive (€51 versus €230 for the landmark method). Results were robust to changes in the model parameters and in the model structure. Whilst our model population reflected approximately 49% of adults undergoing a central venous catheterization cannulation per year, structural sensitivity analyses (e.g. extending the study cohort to patients at higher baseline risk of complications, pediatric patients, or using real-time/indirect catheterization) indicated the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound guidance for a broader spectrum of patients. The results should be interpreted by considering the assumptions (e.g. target population) and approximations (e.g. cost parameters) underpinning the model. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization averts more catheter-related complications and may save the resources of the German Statutory Health Insurance compared with landmark method. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12871-019-0719-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-04-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6456944/ /pubmed/30967124 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-019-0719-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Seleznova, Yana Brass, Patrick Hellmich, Martin Stock, Stephanie Müller, Dirk Cost-effectiveness-analysis of ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization compared with landmark method: a decision-analytic model |
title | Cost-effectiveness-analysis of ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization compared with landmark method: a decision-analytic model |
title_full | Cost-effectiveness-analysis of ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization compared with landmark method: a decision-analytic model |
title_fullStr | Cost-effectiveness-analysis of ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization compared with landmark method: a decision-analytic model |
title_full_unstemmed | Cost-effectiveness-analysis of ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization compared with landmark method: a decision-analytic model |
title_short | Cost-effectiveness-analysis of ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization compared with landmark method: a decision-analytic model |
title_sort | cost-effectiveness-analysis of ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization compared with landmark method: a decision-analytic model |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6456944/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30967124 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-019-0719-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT seleznovayana costeffectivenessanalysisofultrasoundguidanceforcentralvenouscatheterizationcomparedwithlandmarkmethodadecisionanalyticmodel AT brasspatrick costeffectivenessanalysisofultrasoundguidanceforcentralvenouscatheterizationcomparedwithlandmarkmethodadecisionanalyticmodel AT hellmichmartin costeffectivenessanalysisofultrasoundguidanceforcentralvenouscatheterizationcomparedwithlandmarkmethodadecisionanalyticmodel AT stockstephanie costeffectivenessanalysisofultrasoundguidanceforcentralvenouscatheterizationcomparedwithlandmarkmethodadecisionanalyticmodel AT mullerdirk costeffectivenessanalysisofultrasoundguidanceforcentralvenouscatheterizationcomparedwithlandmarkmethodadecisionanalyticmodel |