IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v10y2012i4p273-284.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Treatments for Vertebral Compression Fractures

Author

Listed:
  • Avram Edidin
  • Kevin Ong
  • Edmund Lau
  • Jordana Schmier
  • Jason Kemner
  • Steven Kurtz

Abstract

Background: Vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) can be treated by nonsurgical management or by minimally invasive surgical treatment including vertebroplasty and balloon kyphoplasty. Objective: The purpose of the present study was to characterize the cost to Medicare for treating VCF-diagnosed patients by nonsurgical management, vertebroplasty, or kyphoplasty. We hypothesized that surgical treatments for VCFs using vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty would be a cost-effective alternative to nonsurgical management for the Medicare patient population. Methods: Cost per life-year gained for VCF patients in the US Medicare population was compared between operated (kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty) and non-operated patients and between kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty patients, all as a function of patient age and gender. Life expectancy was estimated using a parametric Weibull survival model (adjusted for comorbidities) for 858 978 VCF patients in the 100% Medicare dataset (2005–2008). Median payer costs were identified for each treatment group for up to 3 years following VCF diagnosis, based on 67018 VCF patients in the 5% Medicare dataset (2005–2008). A discount rate of 3% was used for the base case in the cost-effectiveness analysis, with 0% and 5% discount rates used in sensitivity analyses. Results: After accounting for the differences in median costs and using a discount rate of 3%, the cost per life-year gained for kyphoplasty and ver-tebroplasty patients ranged from $US1863 to $US6687 and from $US2452 to $US13 543, respectively, compared with non-operated patients. The cost per life-year gained for kyphoplasty compared with vertebroplasty ranged from -$US4878 (cost saving) to $US2763. Conclusions: Among patients for whom surgical treatment was indicated, kyphoplasty was found to be cost effective, and perhaps even cost saving, compared with vertebroplasty. Even for the oldest patients (85 years of age and older), both interventions would be considered cost effective in terms of cost per life-year gained. Copyright Springer International Publishing AG 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Avram Edidin & Kevin Ong & Edmund Lau & Jordana Schmier & Jason Kemner & Steven Kurtz, 2012. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Treatments for Vertebral Compression Fractures," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 273-284, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:10:y:2012:i:4:p:273-284
    DOI: 10.2165/11633220-000000000-00000
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/11633220-000000000-00000
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/11633220-000000000-00000?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nicolas Martelli & Capucine Devaux & Hélène van den Brink & Judith Pineau & Patrice Prognon & Isabelle Borget, 2015. "A Systematic Review of the Level of Evidence in Economic Evaluations of Medical Devices: The Example of Vertebroplasty and Kyphoplasty," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-12, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:10:y:2012:i:4:p:273-284. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.