Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Medical Decision Making
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Barrett, B. J.
Right arrow Articles by Detsky, A. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Barrett, B. J.
Right arrow Articles by Detsky, A. S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

An Economic Analysis of Strategies for the Use of Contrast Media for Diagnostic Cardiac Catheterization

Brendan J. Barrett

Patrick S. Parfrey

Robert N. Foley

Allan S. Detsky

A decision tree model was used to estimate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of low- as opposed to high-osmolality contrast media for cardiac angiography. Analyses were done from the viewpoints of a third-party payer and society using data from a randomized trial and the literature. Assuming low-osmolality media reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and stroke, the incremental cost per QALY gained with these media is $17,264 in high-risk or $47,874 in low-risk patients for a third-party payer. From a societal viewpoint, the corresponding costs are $649 and $35,509. These estimates are sensitive to the cost and volume of the contrast medium employed and to the estimate of reduction in severe adverse events with low-osmolality media. The authors conclude that, in the context of restricted budgets, limiting the use of low-osmolality media to high-risk patients is justifiable, as the incremental cost per QALY in high-risk patients may be reasonable and it is not certain that low-osmolality media prevent severe or fatal events. A considerable reduction in the cost per QALY gained is possible by minimizing the volume of contrast medium used. Key words: contrast media; low-osmolality; high-osmolality; cardiac angiography; cost-utility; cost-benefit; cost-effectiveness; economic analysis. (Med Decis Making 1994;14:325- 335)

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 14, No. 4, 325-335 (1994)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9401400403


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
P. C. Sorum
Measuring Patient Preferences by Willingness to Pay to Avoid: The Case of Acute Otitis Media
Med Decis Making, January 1, 1999; 19(1): 27 - 37.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
A. S. Detsky, G. Naglie, M. D. Krahn, D. Naimark, and D. A. Redelmeier
Primer on Medical Decision Analysis: Part 1--Getting Started
Med Decis Making, April 1, 1997; 17(2): 123 - 125.
[Abstract] [PDF]