Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19654097›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2009

Laparoscopic fundoplication compared with medical management for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: cost effectiveness study.

David Epstein, Laura Bojke, Mark J Sculpher, REFLUX trial group

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

David EpsteinCentre for Health Economics, University of York, Heslington, York YO1 5DD.
Laura Bojke
Mark J Sculpher
REFLUX trial group
University of York · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe the long term costs, health benefits, and cost effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery compared with those of continued medical management for patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD).

designWe estimated resource use and costs for the first year on the basis of data from the REFLUX trial. A Markov model was used to extrapolate cost and health benefit over a lifetime using data collected in the REFLUX trial and other sources.

participantsThe model compared laparoscopic surgery and continued proton pump inhibitors in male patients aged 45 and stable on GORD medication.

interventionLaparoscopic surgery versus continued medical management.

main outcome measuresWe estimated quality adjusted life years and GORD related costs to the health service over a lifetime. Sensitivity analyses considered other plausible scenarios, in particular size and duration of treatment effect and the GORD symptoms of patients in whom surgery is unsuccessful. Main results The base case model indicated that surgery is likely to be considered cost effective on average with an incremental cost effectiveness ratio of pound2648 (euro3110; US$4385) per quality adjusted life year and that the probability that surgery is cost effective is 0.94 at a threshold incremental cost effectiveness ratio of pound20 000. The results were sensitive to some assumptions within the extrapolation modelling.

conclusionSurgery seems to be more cost effective on average than medical management in many of the scenarios examined in this study. Surgery might not be cost effective if the treatment effect does not persist over the long term, if patients who return to medical management have poor health related quality of life, or if proton pump inhibitors were cheaper. Further follow-up of patients from the REFLUX trial may be valuable.

trial registrationISRCTN15517081.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAge DistributionCost-Benefit AnalysisFundoplicationGastroesophageal RefluxHealth ResourcesHumansLaparoscopyMaleMarkov ChainsMiddle AgedProton Pump InhibitorsQuality-Adjusted Life YearsQuality of LifeProton Pump Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID19654097
PMCPMC2714673
OpenAlexW2166934748

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.