Abstract | IMPORTANCE: The relative cost per improvement in quality of life can help guide decisions about adding a midurethral sling at the time of prolapse surgery. OBJECTIVE: STUDY DESIGN: Costs and effectiveness were collected as part of a planned secondary analysis from the Outcomes following vaginal Prolapse repair and mid Urethral Sling (OPUS) trial, where 337 women without symptomatic stress urinary incontinence were randomly assigned to a midurethral sling or sham incisions during vaginal prolapse surgery. Within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the societal perspective. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and de novo urinary incontinence. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. RESULTS: Within-trial societal costs were higher for the sling group than for the control group ($18,170 [95% confidence interval (CI), $16,420-$19,920] vs $15,700 [95% CI, $14,110-$17300], P = 0.041). The changes in QALY were 0.04 (95% CI, 0.02-0.06) versus 0.03 (95% CI, 0.02-0.05; P = 0.54). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for prophylactic sling was $309,620/QALY. This is above the generally accepted range of willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000 to $150,000/QALY. At 1 year, urinary incontinence was more common in the control group, and the cost to prevent 1 case was $91. The probability that prophylactic sling is cost-effective is 24%. CONCLUSIONS:
|
Authors | Rui Wang, Paul Tulikangas, Elisabeth C Sappenfield |
Journal | Urogynecology (Philadelphia, Pa.)
(Urogynecology (Phila))
Vol. 29
Issue 5
Pg. 461-468
(05 01 2023)
ISSN: 2771-1897 [Electronic] United States |
PMID | 36701323
(Publication Type: Randomized Controlled Trial, Journal Article)
|
Copyright | Copyright © 2022 American Urogynecologic Society. All rights reserved. |
Topics |
- Female
- Humans
- Suburethral Slings
- Uterine Prolapse
(surgery)
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
- Quality of Life
- Urinary Incontinence
(surgery)
|