Back to Search
Start Over
Minor head injury: CT-based strategies for management--a cost-effectiveness analysis
- Source :
- Radiology, 254, 532-40, Radiology, 254(2), 532-540. Radiological Society of North America Inc., Radiology, 254, 2, pp. 532-40, Radiology, 254(2), 532-540. Radiological Society of North America, Inc.
- Publication Year :
- 2010
-
Abstract
- Contains fulltext : 88949.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) PURPOSE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of using selective computed tomographic (CT) strategies with that of performing CT in all patients with minor head injury (MHI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The internal review board approved the study; written informed consent was obtained from all interviewed patients. Five strategies were evaluated, with CT performed in all patients with MHI; selectively according to the New Orleans criteria (NOC), Canadian CT head rule (CCHR), or CT in head injury patients (CHIP) rule; or in no patients. A decision tree was used to analyze short-term costs and effectiveness, and a Markov model was used to analyze long-term costs and effectiveness. n-Way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses and value-of-information (VOI) analysis were performed. Data from the multicenter CHIP Study involving 3181 patients with MHI were used. Outcome measures were first-year and lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS: Study results showed that performing CT selectively according to the CCHR or the CHIP rule could lead to substantial U.S. cost savings ($120 million and $71 million, respectively), and the CCHR was the most cost-effective at reference-case analysis. When the prediction rule had lower than 97% sensitivity for the identification of patients who required neurosurgery, performing CT in all patients was cost-effective. The CHIP rule was most likely to be cost-effective. At VOI analysis, the expected value of perfect information was $7 billion, mainly because of uncertainty about long-term functional outcomes. Conclusion: Selecting patients with MHI for CT renders cost savings and may be cost-effective, provided the sensitivity for the identification of patients who require neurosurgery is extremely high. Uncertainty regarding long-term functional outcomes after MHI justifies the routine use of CT in all patients with these injuries. 01 februari 2010
- Subjects :
- Male
medicine.medical_specialty
Minor Head Injury
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Neuroinformatics [DCN 3]
Sensitivity and Specificity
Head trauma
Interviews as Topic
medicine
Craniocerebral Trauma
Humans
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging
Glasgow Coma Scale
health care economics and organizations
Retrospective Studies
business.industry
Decision Trees
Effective primary care and public health [NCEBP 7]
Cost-effectiveness analysis
Health economy
Survival Analysis
Markov Chains
Surgery
Quality-adjusted life year
Cost savings
Multicenter study
Cost analysis
Female
Radiology
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
business
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
Monte Carlo Method
Subjects
Details
- ISSN :
- 15271315 and 00338419
- Volume :
- 254
- Issue :
- 2
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- Radiology
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....0e99ecac68351c44c9d4fff084969b27