Cost-effectiveness of neuromuscular ultrasound in focal neuropathies.
other · Level IV
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 31053668.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1212/WNL.0000000000007602 and PMC identifier 6556098.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of neuromuscular ultrasound (NMUS) for the evaluation of focal neuropathies. A prior prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled trial demonstrated that NMUS, when added to electrodiagnostic testing, resulted in improved clinical outcomes after 6 months of follow-up. From this study, we abstracted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) from the 36-item Short Form Health Survey and entered this health-utility estimate into a mixed trial and model-based cost-effectiveness analysis from the societal perspective. Costs of intervention (NMUS) were estimated from Medicare payment rates for Current Procedural Terminology codes. Health care use was otherwise estimated to be equal, but sensitivity analyses further examined this and other key assumptions. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used as the primary outcome with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY. The predicted mean health outcome associated with use of NMUS was 0.079 QALY, and the mean cost was $37, resulting in an ICER of $463 per QALY. Results and conclusions remained robust across all sensitivity analyses, including variations in time horizon, initial distribution of health states, costs, and effectiveness. From a societal perspective, the addition of NMUS to electrodiagnostic testing when evaluating a focal neuropathy is cost-effective. A study of longer follow-up incorporating total health care use would further quantify the value of NMUS. NCT01394822.
Medical subject headings
- Peripheral Nervous System Diseases
- Ultrasonography