Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

A cost-effectiveness analysis of tension-free vaginal tape versus laparoscopic mesh colposuspension for primary female stress incontinence.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006; 85(12):1485-90.AO

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of cost-effectiveness of new surgical techniques is important. As the data on incontinence procedures are scarce, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of tension-free vaginal tape procedure and laparoscopic mesh colposuspension as a primary surgical treatment for female stress urinary incontinence.

METHODS

In four university teaching hospitals and two central hospitals 128 stress incontinent women were randomized to tension-free vaginal tape procedure (n=70) or laparoscopic mesh colposuspension (n=51) in order to investigate the clinical performance of these two procedures. Primary objective clinical outcome measures were: stress test and 48-h pad test. Secondary subjective outcome measures were health-related quality of life measured in terms of visual analogue scale and Urinary Incontinence Severity Score. Alongside the clinical trial, a cost-effectiveness analysis for the main outcome measures was performed.

RESULTS

The changes in the 48-h pad test result did not reach statistical significance (p=0.105). When the visual analogue scale or Urinary Incontinence Severity Score are used as the outcome measure, the tension-free vaginal tape is more cost-effective than laparoscopic mesh colposuspension over a follow-up period of one year (p<0.000).

CONCLUSION

The clinical and economic data of the present study suggest that over a follow-up period of one year the tension-free vaginal tape procedure is more cost-effective than laparoscopic mesh colposuspension as a primary treatment for female stress urinary incontinence.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland. antti.valpas@ekshp.fiNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial

Language

eng

PubMed ID

17260226

Citation

Valpas, Antti, et al. "A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Tension-free Vaginal Tape Versus Laparoscopic Mesh Colposuspension for Primary Female Stress Incontinence." Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica, vol. 85, no. 12, 2006, pp. 1485-90.
Valpas A, Rissanen P, Kujansuu E, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of tension-free vaginal tape versus laparoscopic mesh colposuspension for primary female stress incontinence. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006;85(12):1485-90.
Valpas, A., Rissanen, P., Kujansuu, E., & Nilsson, C. G. (2006). A cost-effectiveness analysis of tension-free vaginal tape versus laparoscopic mesh colposuspension for primary female stress incontinence. Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 85(12), 1485-90.
Valpas A, et al. A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Tension-free Vaginal Tape Versus Laparoscopic Mesh Colposuspension for Primary Female Stress Incontinence. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006;85(12):1485-90. PubMed PMID: 17260226.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - A cost-effectiveness analysis of tension-free vaginal tape versus laparoscopic mesh colposuspension for primary female stress incontinence. AU - Valpas,Antti, AU - Rissanen,Pekka, AU - Kujansuu,Erkki, AU - Nilsson,Carl-Gustaf, PY - 2007/1/30/pubmed PY - 2007/2/22/medline PY - 2007/1/30/entrez SP - 1485 EP - 90 JF - Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica JO - Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand VL - 85 IS - 12 N2 - BACKGROUND: Evaluation of cost-effectiveness of new surgical techniques is important. As the data on incontinence procedures are scarce, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of tension-free vaginal tape procedure and laparoscopic mesh colposuspension as a primary surgical treatment for female stress urinary incontinence. METHODS: In four university teaching hospitals and two central hospitals 128 stress incontinent women were randomized to tension-free vaginal tape procedure (n=70) or laparoscopic mesh colposuspension (n=51) in order to investigate the clinical performance of these two procedures. Primary objective clinical outcome measures were: stress test and 48-h pad test. Secondary subjective outcome measures were health-related quality of life measured in terms of visual analogue scale and Urinary Incontinence Severity Score. Alongside the clinical trial, a cost-effectiveness analysis for the main outcome measures was performed. RESULTS: The changes in the 48-h pad test result did not reach statistical significance (p=0.105). When the visual analogue scale or Urinary Incontinence Severity Score are used as the outcome measure, the tension-free vaginal tape is more cost-effective than laparoscopic mesh colposuspension over a follow-up period of one year (p<0.000). CONCLUSION: The clinical and economic data of the present study suggest that over a follow-up period of one year the tension-free vaginal tape procedure is more cost-effective than laparoscopic mesh colposuspension as a primary treatment for female stress urinary incontinence. SN - 0001-6349 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/17260226/A_cost_effectiveness_analysis_of_tension_free_vaginal_tape_versus_laparoscopic_mesh_colposuspension_for_primary_female_stress_incontinence_ L2 - https://doi.org/10.1080/00016340601033584 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -