Aim: Rectus abdominal diastasis (RAD) can cause mainly incontinence and lower-back pain. Despite its high incidence, there is no consensus regarding surgical indication. We aimed at comparing RAD repair (minimally invasive technique with mesh implant) with no treatment (standard of care - SOC) through cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses from both National Healthcare Service (NHS) and societal perspectives in Italy. Methods: A model was developed including social costs and productivity losses derived by the online administration of a socio-economic questionnaire, including the EuroQol for the assessment of quality of life. Costs for the NHS were based on reimbursement tariffs. Results: Over a lifetime horizon, estimated costs were 64,115€ for SOC and 46,541€ for RAD repair in the societal perspective; QALYs were 19.55 and 25.75 for the two groups, respectively. Considering the NHS perspective, RAD repair showed an additional cost per patient of 5,104€ compared to SOC, leading to an ICUR of 824€. RAD repair may be either cost-saving or cost-effective compared to SOC depending on the perspective considered. Considering a current scenario of 100% SOC, an increased diffusion of RAD repair from 2 to 10% in the next 5 years would lead to an incremental cost of 184,147,624€ for the whole society (87% borne by the NHS) and to incremental 16,155 QALYs. Conclusion: In light of the lack of economic evaluations for minimally invasive RAD repair, the present study provides relevant clinical and economic evidence to help improving the decision-making process and allocating scarce resources between competing ends.

Economic value of diastasis repair with the use of mesh compared to no intervention in Italy

Rognoni, Carla
;
Tarricone, Rosanna
In corso di stampa

Abstract

Aim: Rectus abdominal diastasis (RAD) can cause mainly incontinence and lower-back pain. Despite its high incidence, there is no consensus regarding surgical indication. We aimed at comparing RAD repair (minimally invasive technique with mesh implant) with no treatment (standard of care - SOC) through cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses from both National Healthcare Service (NHS) and societal perspectives in Italy. Methods: A model was developed including social costs and productivity losses derived by the online administration of a socio-economic questionnaire, including the EuroQol for the assessment of quality of life. Costs for the NHS were based on reimbursement tariffs. Results: Over a lifetime horizon, estimated costs were 64,115€ for SOC and 46,541€ for RAD repair in the societal perspective; QALYs were 19.55 and 25.75 for the two groups, respectively. Considering the NHS perspective, RAD repair showed an additional cost per patient of 5,104€ compared to SOC, leading to an ICUR of 824€. RAD repair may be either cost-saving or cost-effective compared to SOC depending on the perspective considered. Considering a current scenario of 100% SOC, an increased diffusion of RAD repair from 2 to 10% in the next 5 years would lead to an incremental cost of 184,147,624€ for the whole society (87% borne by the NHS) and to incremental 16,155 QALYs. Conclusion: In light of the lack of economic evaluations for minimally invasive RAD repair, the present study provides relevant clinical and economic evidence to help improving the decision-making process and allocating scarce resources between competing ends.
In corso di stampa
2024
Rognoni, Carla; Carrara, Alessandro; Piccoli, Micaela; Trapani, Vincenzo; Vettoretto, Nereo; Soliani, Giorgio; Tarricone, Rosanna
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Rognoni_et_al-2024-The_European_Journal_of_Health_Economics.pdf

non disponibili

Descrizione: Articolo pubblicato
Tipologia: Pdf editoriale (Publisher's layout)
Licenza: NON PUBBLICO - Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione 1.35 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.35 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11565/4063276
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact