ArticleSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2015
Cost-effectiveness of obstructive sleep apnea screening for patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease.
Article in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Content Comparison of Quality-of-Life Instruments Used in Economic Evaluations of Sleep Disorder Interventions: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Pooled it
- Economic Modelling of Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Literature Review to Inform Conceptual Model Design.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Pooled it
- Cost Effectiveness of Dapagliflozin Added to Standard of Care for the Management of Diabetic Nephropathy in the USA.Clinical drug investigation · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common disorder with a high prevalence among patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes, and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Routine evaluation of OSA for patients with CVD including hypertension has been performed according to the clinical guidelines for both OSA and CVD. However, most patients with diabetes and CKD who could benefit from treatment remain undiagnosed because routine screening of OSA is not recognized as part of standard practice. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of OSA screening for patients with diabetes and CKD.
methodsCost-effectiveness analysis by a decision tree and Markov modeling from the societal perspective in Japan was carried out to provide evidence based on the economic evaluation of current clinical practice concerning diabetes and CKD.
resultsIncremental cost-effectiveness ratios of OSA screening compared with do-nothing were calculated as ¥3,516,976 to 4,514,813/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) (US$35,170 to 45,148/QALY) for diabetes patients and ¥3,666,946 to 4,006,866/QALY (US$36,669 to 40,069/QALY) for CKD patients.
conclusionsTaking the threshold to judge cost-effectiveness according to a suggested value of social willingness to pay for one QALY gain in Japan as ¥5 million/QALY (US$50,000QALY), OSA screening is cost-effective. Our results suggest that active case screening and treatment of OSA for untreated middle-aged male patients with diabetes or CKD could be justifiable as an efficient use of finite health-care resources in the world with high prevalence of these diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25643768What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.