ArticleMedical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran2016
EOS imaging versus current radiography: A health technology assessment study.
Article in Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health technology assessment in musculoskeletal radiology: the case study of EOSedge™.La Radiologia medica · 2024Article
- Accuracy of biplanar linear radiography versus conventional radiographs when used for lower limb and implant measurements.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2022Article
- Pre-operative predictive factors of residual varus on the mechanical axis after Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- The EOS 3D imaging system reliably measures posterior tibial slope.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2021Article
- Biplanar Low-Dose Radiography Is Accurate for Measuring Combined Anteversion After Total Hip Arthroplasty.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2020Article
- A Comparison of Patients Absorption Doses with Bone Deformity Due to the EOS Imaging and Digital Radiology.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2017Article
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
backgroundEOS is a 2D/3D muscle skeletal diagnostic imaging system. The device has been developed to produce a high quality 2D, full body radiographs in standing, sitting and squatting positions. Three dimensional images can be reconstructed via sterEOS software. This Health Technology Assessment study aimed to investigate efficacy, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of new emerged EOS imaging system in comparison with conventional x-ray radiographic techniques.
methodsAll cost and outcome data were assessed from Iran's Ministry of Health Perspective. Data for clinical effectiveness was extracted using a rigorous systematic review. As clinical outcomes the rate of x-ray emission and related quality of life were compared with Computed Radiography (CR) and Digital Radiography (DR). Standard costing method was conducted to find related direct medical costs. In order to examine robustness of the calculated Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) we used two-way sensitivity analysis. GDP Per capita of Islamic Republic of Iran (2012) adopted as cost-effectiveness threshold.
resultsReview of related literature highlighted the lack of rigorous evidence for clinical outcomes. Ultra low dose EOS imaging device is known as a safe intervention because of FDA, CE and CSA certificates. The rate of emitted X-ray was 2 to 18 fold lower for EOS compared to the conventional techniques (p<0.001). The Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio for EOS relative to CR calculated $50706 in baseline analysis (the first scenario) and $50714, $9446 respectively for the second and third scenarios. Considering the value of neither $42146 as upper limit, nor the first neither the second scenario could pass the cost-effectiveness threshold for Iran.
conclusionEOS imaging technique might not be considered as a cost-effective intervention in routine practice of health system, especially within in-patient wards. Scenario analysis shows that, only in an optimum condition such as lower assembling costs and higher utilization rates, the device can be recruited for research and therapeutic purposes in pediatric orthopedic centers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27390701PMC4898869What 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.