Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25381046›Full record

ReviewOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2015

Health economic aspects of vertebral augmentation procedures.

F Borgström, D P Beall, S Berven, S Boonen, S Christie, D F Kallmes, J A Kanis, G Olafsson, A J Singer, K Åkesson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 9 institutions in 5 countries.

F BorgströmQuantify Research, Stockholm, Sweden, fredrik.borgstrom@quantifyresearch.com.
D P Beall
S Berven
S Boonen
S Christie
D F Kallmes
J A Kanis
G Olafsson
A J Singer
K Åkesson
Dalhousie University · CAGeorgetown University · USKarolinska Institutet · SEKU Leuven · BEMayo Clinic in Arizona · USQuantify Research (Sweden) · SESkåne University Hospital · SEUniversity of California San Francisco Medical Center · USUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We reviewed all peer-reviewed papers analysing the cost-effectiveness of vertebroplasty and balloon kyphoplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. In general, the procedures appear to be cost effective but are very dependent upon model input details. Better data, rather than new models, are needed to answer outstanding questions. Vertebral augmentation procedures (VAPs), including vertebroplasty (VP) and balloon kyphoplasty (BKP), seek to stabilise fractured vertebral bodies and reduce pain. The aim of this paper is to review current literature on the cost-effectiveness of VAPs as well as to discuss the challenges for economic evaluation in this research area. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify existing published studies on the cost-effectiveness of VAPs in patients with osteoporosis. Only peer-reviewed published articles that fulfilled the criteria of being regarded as full economic evaluations including both morbidity and mortality in the outcome measure in the form of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were included. The search identified 949 studies, of which four (0.4 %) were identified as relevant with one study added later. The reviewed studies differed widely in terms of study design, modelling framework and data used, yielding different results and conclusions regarding the cost-effectiveness of VAPs. Three out of five studies indicated in the base case results that VAPs were cost effective compared to non-surgical management (NSM). The five main factors that drove the variations in the cost-effectiveness between the studies were time horizon, quality of life effect of treatment, offset time of the treatment effect, reduced number of bed days associated with VAPs and mortality benefit with treatment. The cost-effectiveness of VAPs is uncertain. In answering the remaining questions, new cost-effectiveness analysis will yield limited benefit. Rather, studies that can reduce the uncertainty in the underlying data, especially regarding the long-term clinical outcomes of VAPs, should be conducted.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisFractures, CompressionHealth Care CostsHumansKyphoplastyOsteoporotic FracturesQuality of LifeSpinal FracturesVertebroplasty

Identifiers

PMID25381046
OpenAlexW2003168499

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.