Cost-effectiveness analysis of using the heat and moisture exchangers compared with alternative stoma covers in laryngectomy rehabilitation: US perspective.

Abstract

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis were conducted including uncertainty analyses using real-world survey data with pulmonary events and productivity loss.

CONCLUSIONS

HME utilization in laryngectomy patients was cost-effective. Reimbursement of HME devices is thus recommended. Utilities may be underestimated due to the generic utility instrument used and sample size. Therefore, we recommend development of a disease-specific utility tool to incorporate in future analyses.

BACKGROUND

This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of using heat and moisture exchangers (HMEs) vs alternative stoma covers (ASCs) following laryngectomy in the United States.

RESULTS

HME use was more effective and less costly compared with ASCs. Quality-adjusted life years were slightly higher for HME-users. Total costs per patient (lifetime) were $59 362 (HME) and $102 416 (ASC). Pulmonary events and productivity loss occurred more frequently in the ASC-users. Annual budget savings were up to $40 183 593. Costs per pulmonary event averted were $3770.

More about this publication

Head & neck
  • Volume 42
  • Issue nr. 12
  • Pages 3720-3734
  • Publication date 01-12-2020

This site uses cookies

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.