Healthcare resource consumption for intermittent urinary catheterisation: cost-effectiveness of hydrophilic catheters and budget impact analyses.
other · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 28096251.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012360 and PMC identifier 5253566.
- Licence recorded as CC BY-NC.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
This study presents a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing hydrophilic coated to uncoated catheters for patients performing urinary intermittent catheterisation. A national budget impact analysis is also included to evaluate the impact of intermittent catheterisation for management of bladder dysfunctions over a period of 5 years. A Markov model (lifetime horizon, 1 year cycle length) was developed to project health outcomes (life years and quality-adjusted life years) and economic consequences related to patients using hydrophilic coated or uncoated catheters. The model was populated with catheter-related clinical efficacy data retrieved from randomised controlled trials and quality-of-life data (utility weights) from the literature. Cost data (EUR, 2015) were estimated on the basis of healthcare resource consumption derived from an e-survey addressed to key opinion leaders in the field. Italian Healthcare Service perspective. Patients with spinal cord injury performing intermittent urinary catheterisation in the home setting. Incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios (ICER and ICUR) of hydrophilic coated versus uncoated catheters and associated healthcare budget impact. The base-case ICER and ICUR associated with hydrophilic coated catheters were €20 761 and €24 405, respectively. This implies that hydrophilic coated catheters are likely to be cost-effective in comparison to uncoated ones, as proposed Italian threshold values range between €25 000 and €66 400. Considering a market share at year 5 of 89% hydrophilic catheters and 11% uncoated catheters, the additional cost for Italy is approximately €12 million in the next 5 years (current market share scenario for year 0: 80% hydrophilic catheters and 20% uncoated catheters). Considered over a lifetime, hydrophilic coated catheters are potentially a cost-effective choice in comparison to uncoated ones. These findings can assist policymakers in evaluating intermittent catheterisation in patients with spinal cord injury.
Medical subject headings
- Hematuria
- Intermittent Urethral Catheterization
- Urinary Tract Infections