Cost-Effectiveness v Patient Preference in the Choice of Treatment for Distal Ureteral Calculi: A Literature-Based Decision Analysis
- 1 June 1995
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Mary Ann Liebert Inc in Journal of Endourology
- Vol. 9 (3) , 243-248
- https://doi.org/10.1089/end.1995.9.243
Abstract
Ureteroscopy (URS) and extracorporeal Shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) battle for supremacy in the management of distal ureteral calculi. In order to clarify issues surrounding this controversy, we created a decision tree modeling URS or SWL with literature-based probabilities and used as endpoints both cost and patient preferences. Ureteroscopy was more successful than single-session or multiple-session SWL, 92.1% v 74.3% or 84.5%, and had a lower retreutment/complication rate. Although initial SWL was only slightly more expensive than URS, $4,420 v $4,337, the difference increased when the additional costs of complications and retreatment were calculated, $6,745 v $5,555. Using values for an "average" patient, SWL was preferred to URS in terms of patient satisfaction. The most important factors distinguishing between URS and SWL were the success of treatment, the cost of initial therapy, and patient attitudes toward unplanned ancillary procedures and retreatment. Although no alteration of success rates and cost figures within reasonable ranges made URS less cost-effective than SWL, individual differences in patients' aversion for complications allowed URS to be preferred to SWL in some situations. Therefore, SWL is less cost-effective than URS and is not necessarily preferred by patients. The physician should be aware of the principal determinants of the choice between URS and SWL treatment of distal ureteral calculi.Keywords
This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- Incorporating Patients' Preferences into Medical DecisionsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1994
- Ureteroscopy for lower ureteral stonesUrology, 1993
- ESWL: Distal ureteral stone management-1993Urology, 1993
- Cost-Efficacy Comparison of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy and Endoscopic Laser Lithotripsy in Distal Ureteral Stones*Journal of Endourology, 1993
- ESWL in situ or ureteroscopy for ureteric stones?World Journal of Urology, 1993
- Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Versus Ureteroscopic Laser Lithotripsy: A Cost Comparison AnalysisJournal of Endourology, 1989
- In SituESWL ν Ureteroscopy: The Case for Ureteroscopy*Journal of Endourology, 1989
- Management of Ureteral Calculi: The Impact of Anesthesia-Free ESWL*Journal of Endourology, 1989
- Primary Choice of Intervention for Distal Ureteric Stone: Ureteroscopy or ESWL?British Journal of Urology, 1988
- Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy of Distal Ureteral CalculiEuropean Urology, 1986