This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Hornberger, J. C. Articles by Garrison, L. P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hornberger, J. C. Articles by Garrison, L. P., Jr. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Cost-Effectiveness of Repeat Medical Procedures

Kidney Transplantation as an Example

Jennie H. Best, MA

Louis P. Garrison, Jr., PhD

The constraints on medical-care resources can give rise to the question of the cost- effectiveness of permitting repeat medical procedures when some patients may die without undergoing even a first procedure. Using kidney transplantation as an example, this study estimates the cost-effectiveness of patients' having available the option of a repeat medical procedure in the event the first procedure fails. Specifically, the anal ysis examines the effect on transplant candidates of having the option of kidney re transplantation, if and when retransplantation might be needed. Data sources include the U.S. Renal Data System (USRDS) Case-Mix Severity Study, Health Care Financ ing Administration (HCFA) data, and a MEDLINE search. Outcome measures include life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy, lifetime costs of medical care, and mar ginal cost-effectiveness from a societal perspective. By avoiding lifelong dialysis after graft failure, first-transplant candidates gain an average of 47 quality-adjusted days with a retransplantation policy, despite the prolongation of time to first transplant by an average of 30 quality-adjusted days. The lifetime cost of medical care per first- transplant candidate is $1,210 higher with a retransplantation policy compared with the no-retransplantation policy; its societal cost-effectiveness is estimated to be $9,656 per quality-adjusted life-year saved. The retransplantation policy provides the greatest improvement in quality-adjusted life expectancy for younger candidates. In the case of kidney transplantation, the cost-effectiveness of a repeat transplant, on average, com pares favorably with those of other medical strategies in common practice. As re sources become increasingly constrained, this study demonstrates a framework for considering the cost-effectiveness of repeat medical procedures. Key words: kidney transplantation; decision analysis; cost-effectiveness analysis; ethics; rationing. (Med Decis Making 1997;17:363-372))

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 17, No. 4, 363-372 (1997)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9701700401


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Loupy, D. Anglicheau, C. Suberbielle, A. Mejean, F. Martinez, J. Zuber, M.-F. Mamzer-Bruneel, H. Kreis, E. Thervet, N. Thiounn, et al. Long-term outcome of third kidney transplants Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., September 1, 2007; 22(9): 2693 - 2700. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. A. Knoll and G. Nichol Dialysis, Kidney Transplantation, or Pancreas Transplantation for Patients with Diabetes Mellitus and Renal Failure: A Decision Analysis of Treatment Options J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., February 1, 2003; 14(2): 500 - 515. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]