Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Cost-effectiveness of botulinum toxin a versus anticholinergic medications for idiopathic urge incontinence.
J Urol. 2009 May; 181(5):2181-6.JU

Abstract

PURPOSE

We assessed the cost-effectiveness of botulinum toxin A injection compared to anticholinergic medications for the treatment of idiopathic urge incontinence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A Markov decision analysis model was developed to compare the costs in 2008 U. S. dollars and effectiveness in quality adjusted life-years of botulinum toxin A injection and anticholinergic medications. The analysis was conducted from a societal perspective with a 2-year time frame using 3-month cycles. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, defined as the difference in cost (botulinum toxin A cost--anticholinergic cost) divided by the difference in effectiveness (botulinum toxin A quality adjusted life-years--anticholinergic quality adjusted life-years).

RESULTS

While the botulinum strategy was more expensive ($4,392 vs $2,563) it was also more effective (1.63 vs 1.50 quality adjusted life-years) compared to the anticholinergic regimen. The calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $14,377 per quality adjusted life-year, meaning that botulinum toxin A cost $14,377 per quality adjusted life-year gained. A strategy is often considered cost-effective when the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is less than $50,000 per quality adjusted life-year. Given this definition botulinum toxin A is cost-effective compared to anticholinergics. To determine if there are situations in which anticholinergics would become cost-effective we performed sensitivity analyses. Anticholinergics become cost-effective if compliance exceeds 75% (33% in the base case) and if the botulinum toxin A procedure cost exceeds $3,875 ($1,690 in the base case). For the remainder of the sensitivity analyses botulinum toxin A remained cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Botulinum toxin A injection was cost-effective compared to anticholinergic medications for the treatment of refractory urge incontinence. Anticholinergics become cost-effective if patients are highly compliant with medications or if the botulinum procedure costs increase substantially.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA. Jennifer.wu@duke.eduNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

19296983

Citation

Wu, Jennifer M., et al. "Cost-effectiveness of Botulinum Toxin a Versus Anticholinergic Medications for Idiopathic Urge Incontinence." The Journal of Urology, vol. 181, no. 5, 2009, pp. 2181-6.
Wu JM, Siddiqui NY, Amundsen CL, et al. Cost-effectiveness of botulinum toxin a versus anticholinergic medications for idiopathic urge incontinence. J Urol. 2009;181(5):2181-6.
Wu, J. M., Siddiqui, N. Y., Amundsen, C. L., Myers, E. R., Havrilesky, L. J., & Visco, A. G. (2009). Cost-effectiveness of botulinum toxin a versus anticholinergic medications for idiopathic urge incontinence. The Journal of Urology, 181(5), 2181-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.01.037
Wu JM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of Botulinum Toxin a Versus Anticholinergic Medications for Idiopathic Urge Incontinence. J Urol. 2009;181(5):2181-6. PubMed PMID: 19296983.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Cost-effectiveness of botulinum toxin a versus anticholinergic medications for idiopathic urge incontinence. AU - Wu,Jennifer M, AU - Siddiqui,Nazema Y, AU - Amundsen,Cindy L, AU - Myers,Evan R, AU - Havrilesky,Laura J, AU - Visco,Anthony G, Y1 - 2009/03/17/ PY - 2008/09/17/received PY - 2009/3/20/entrez PY - 2009/3/20/pubmed PY - 2009/5/5/medline SP - 2181 EP - 6 JF - The Journal of urology JO - J Urol VL - 181 IS - 5 N2 - PURPOSE: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of botulinum toxin A injection compared to anticholinergic medications for the treatment of idiopathic urge incontinence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Markov decision analysis model was developed to compare the costs in 2008 U. S. dollars and effectiveness in quality adjusted life-years of botulinum toxin A injection and anticholinergic medications. The analysis was conducted from a societal perspective with a 2-year time frame using 3-month cycles. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, defined as the difference in cost (botulinum toxin A cost--anticholinergic cost) divided by the difference in effectiveness (botulinum toxin A quality adjusted life-years--anticholinergic quality adjusted life-years). RESULTS: While the botulinum strategy was more expensive ($4,392 vs $2,563) it was also more effective (1.63 vs 1.50 quality adjusted life-years) compared to the anticholinergic regimen. The calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $14,377 per quality adjusted life-year, meaning that botulinum toxin A cost $14,377 per quality adjusted life-year gained. A strategy is often considered cost-effective when the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is less than $50,000 per quality adjusted life-year. Given this definition botulinum toxin A is cost-effective compared to anticholinergics. To determine if there are situations in which anticholinergics would become cost-effective we performed sensitivity analyses. Anticholinergics become cost-effective if compliance exceeds 75% (33% in the base case) and if the botulinum toxin A procedure cost exceeds $3,875 ($1,690 in the base case). For the remainder of the sensitivity analyses botulinum toxin A remained cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Botulinum toxin A injection was cost-effective compared to anticholinergic medications for the treatment of refractory urge incontinence. Anticholinergics become cost-effective if patients are highly compliant with medications or if the botulinum procedure costs increase substantially. SN - 1527-3792 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/19296983/Cost_effectiveness_of_botulinum_toxin_a_versus_anticholinergic_medications_for_idiopathic_urge_incontinence_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -