Publication:
Cost-utility analysis of great saphenous vein ablation with radiofrequency, foam and surgery in the emerging health-care setting of Thailand

dc.contributor.authorBoonying Siribumrungwongen_US
dc.contributor.authorPinit Nooriten_US
dc.contributor.authorChumpon Wilasrusmeeen_US
dc.contributor.authorPattara Leelahavarongen_US
dc.contributor.authorAmmarin Thakkinstianen_US
dc.contributor.authorYot Teerawattananonen_US
dc.contributor.otherFaculty of Medicine, Thammasat Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherChonburi Regional Hospitalen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherThailand Ministry of Public Healthen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-11T03:29:24Z
dc.date.accessioned2019-03-14T08:02:08Z
dc.date.available2018-12-11T03:29:24Z
dc.date.available2019-03-14T08:02:08Z
dc.date.issued2016-09-01en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2015, © The Author(s) 2015. Objectives: To conduct economic evaluations of radiofrequency ablation, ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy and surgery for great saphenous vein ablation. Method: A cost-utility and cohort analysis from societal perspective was performed to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Transitional probabilities were from meta-analysis. Direct medical, direct non-medical, indirect costs, and utility were from standard Thai costings and cohort. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to assess parameter uncertainties. Results: Seventy-seven patients (31 radiofrequency ablation, 19 ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy, and 27 surgeries) were enrolled from October 2011 to February 2013. Compared with surgery, radiofrequency ablation costed 12,935 and 20,872 Baht higher, whereas ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy costed 6159 lower and 1558 Bath higher for outpatient and inpatient, respectively. At one year, radiofrequency ablation had slightly lower quality-adjusted life-year, whereas ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy yielded additional 0.025 quality-adjusted life-year gained. Because of costing lower and greater quality-adjusted life-year than other compared alternatives, outpatient ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy was an option being dominant. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis resulted that at the Thai ceiling threshold of 160,000 Baht/quality-adjusted life-year gained, ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy had chances of 0.71 to be cost-effective. Conclusions: Ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy seems to be cost-effective for treating great saphenous vein reflux compared to surgery in Thailand at one-year results.en_US
dc.identifier.citationPhlebology. Vol.31, No.8 (2016), 573-581en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/0268355515604258en_US
dc.identifier.issn14333031en_US
dc.identifier.issn02683555en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84983059067en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/41205
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84983059067&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleCost-utility analysis of great saphenous vein ablation with radiofrequency, foam and surgery in the emerging health-care setting of Thailanden_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84983059067&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections