Cargando…
Colonoscopy in poorly prepped colons: a cost effectiveness analysis comparing standard of care to a new cleansing technology
BACKGROUND: The objective of this Markov model lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis was to evaluate a new medical device technology which minimizes redo colonoscopies on the outcomes of cost, quality of life, and aversion of colorectal cancers (CRC). METHODS: A new technology (PureVu® System) which...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8082895/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33926476 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-021-00277-5 |
_version_ | 1783685924989698048 |
---|---|
author | Voigt, Jeffrey Mosier, Michael Gralnek, Ian M. |
author_facet | Voigt, Jeffrey Mosier, Michael Gralnek, Ian M. |
author_sort | Voigt, Jeffrey |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The objective of this Markov model lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis was to evaluate a new medical device technology which minimizes redo colonoscopies on the outcomes of cost, quality of life, and aversion of colorectal cancers (CRC). METHODS: A new technology (PureVu® System) which cleans inadequately prepped colons was evaluated using TreeAge 2019 software in patients who presented with inadequate prep in outpatient settings in the US. PureVu was compared to the standard of care (SOC). Peer reviewed literature was used to identify the CRC incidence cancers based on missing polyps. Costs for procedures were derived from 2019 Medicare and from estimated private payer reimbursements. Base case costs, sensitivity analysis and incremental cost effectiveness (ICE) were evaluated. The cost of PureVu was $750. RESULTS: Assuming a national average compliance rate of 60% for colonoscopy, the use of PureVu saved the healthcare system $833–$992/patient depending upon the insurer when compared to SOC. QALYs were also improved with PureVu mainly due to a lower incidence of CRCs. In sensitivity analysis, SOC becomes less expensive than PureVu when compliance to screening for CRC using colonoscopy is ≤ 28%. Also, in order for SOC to be less expensive than PureVu, the list price of PureVu would need to exceed $1753. In incremental cost effectiveness analysis, PureVu dominated SOC. CONCLUSION: Using the PureVu System to improve bowel prep can save the healthcare system $3.1–$3.7 billion per year, while ensuring a similar quality of life and reducing the incidence of CRCs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-021-00277-5. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8082895 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80828952021-04-29 Colonoscopy in poorly prepped colons: a cost effectiveness analysis comparing standard of care to a new cleansing technology Voigt, Jeffrey Mosier, Michael Gralnek, Ian M. Cost Eff Resour Alloc Research BACKGROUND: The objective of this Markov model lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis was to evaluate a new medical device technology which minimizes redo colonoscopies on the outcomes of cost, quality of life, and aversion of colorectal cancers (CRC). METHODS: A new technology (PureVu® System) which cleans inadequately prepped colons was evaluated using TreeAge 2019 software in patients who presented with inadequate prep in outpatient settings in the US. PureVu was compared to the standard of care (SOC). Peer reviewed literature was used to identify the CRC incidence cancers based on missing polyps. Costs for procedures were derived from 2019 Medicare and from estimated private payer reimbursements. Base case costs, sensitivity analysis and incremental cost effectiveness (ICE) were evaluated. The cost of PureVu was $750. RESULTS: Assuming a national average compliance rate of 60% for colonoscopy, the use of PureVu saved the healthcare system $833–$992/patient depending upon the insurer when compared to SOC. QALYs were also improved with PureVu mainly due to a lower incidence of CRCs. In sensitivity analysis, SOC becomes less expensive than PureVu when compliance to screening for CRC using colonoscopy is ≤ 28%. Also, in order for SOC to be less expensive than PureVu, the list price of PureVu would need to exceed $1753. In incremental cost effectiveness analysis, PureVu dominated SOC. CONCLUSION: Using the PureVu System to improve bowel prep can save the healthcare system $3.1–$3.7 billion per year, while ensuring a similar quality of life and reducing the incidence of CRCs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-021-00277-5. BioMed Central 2021-04-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8082895/ /pubmed/33926476 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-021-00277-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Voigt, Jeffrey Mosier, Michael Gralnek, Ian M. Colonoscopy in poorly prepped colons: a cost effectiveness analysis comparing standard of care to a new cleansing technology |
title | Colonoscopy in poorly prepped colons: a cost effectiveness analysis comparing standard of care to a new cleansing technology |
title_full | Colonoscopy in poorly prepped colons: a cost effectiveness analysis comparing standard of care to a new cleansing technology |
title_fullStr | Colonoscopy in poorly prepped colons: a cost effectiveness analysis comparing standard of care to a new cleansing technology |
title_full_unstemmed | Colonoscopy in poorly prepped colons: a cost effectiveness analysis comparing standard of care to a new cleansing technology |
title_short | Colonoscopy in poorly prepped colons: a cost effectiveness analysis comparing standard of care to a new cleansing technology |
title_sort | colonoscopy in poorly prepped colons: a cost effectiveness analysis comparing standard of care to a new cleansing technology |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8082895/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33926476 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-021-00277-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT voigtjeffrey colonoscopyinpoorlypreppedcolonsacosteffectivenessanalysiscomparingstandardofcaretoanewcleansingtechnology AT mosiermichael colonoscopyinpoorlypreppedcolonsacosteffectivenessanalysiscomparingstandardofcaretoanewcleansingtechnology AT gralnekianm colonoscopyinpoorlypreppedcolonsacosteffectivenessanalysiscomparingstandardofcaretoanewcleansingtechnology |