International journal of spine surgery · 2020
Economics of Cervical Disc Replacement.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Radcliff Kris, Guyer Richard D
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although extensive reports of clinical outcome after cervical disc replacement (CDR) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion exist, few reviews of the cost-effectiveness research in cervical spine surgery exist. The purpose of this study was to review the concepts of cost-effectiveness research, the various approaches to cost-effectiveness studies in the context of cervical spine surgery, and some of the literature results.
METHODS: Review article describing cost-effectiveness research concepts, methodology, and results. The article reviews the concept of value, cost, utility, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and recent research.
RESULTS: Mixed data on cost-effectiveness of CDR compared with fusion exist. Notably, several studies performed within the last 5 years that use prospectively collected utility scores, costs, and adverse event calculations demonstrate a significant cost savings associated with CDR compared with fusion.
CONCLUSIONS: The recent literature confirms that, in properly selected patients, CDR is more effective and less costly over a 7-year time horizon for patients with symptomatic degenerative disc disease. The primary driver of the differential in cost effectiveness is the difference in secondary surgery rates.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 5 CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In properly selected patients, CDR is more effective and less costly over a 7-year time horizon for patients with symptomatic degenerative disc disease.
METHODS: Review article describing cost-effectiveness research concepts, methodology, and results. The article reviews the concept of value, cost, utility, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and recent research.
RESULTS: Mixed data on cost-effectiveness of CDR compared with fusion exist. Notably, several studies performed within the last 5 years that use prospectively collected utility scores, costs, and adverse event calculations demonstrate a significant cost savings associated with CDR compared with fusion.
CONCLUSIONS: The recent literature confirms that, in properly selected patients, CDR is more effective and less costly over a 7-year time horizon for patients with symptomatic degenerative disc disease. The primary driver of the differential in cost effectiveness is the difference in secondary surgery rates.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 5 CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In properly selected patients, CDR is more effective and less costly over a 7-year time horizon for patients with symptomatic degenerative disc disease.