ArticleCMAJ open
Outpatient uterine assessment and treatment unit in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding: an economic modelling study.
Article in CMAJ open. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultrasound and blind endometrial sampling for detection of endometrial cancer in women with postmenopausal bleeding.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Review
- Interventions to improve access to care for abnormal uterine bleeding: A systematic scoping review.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMost often in Canada, the evaluation and management of abnormal uterine bleeding occurs under general anesthesia in the operating room. We aimed to assess the potential cost-effectiveness of an outpatient uterine assessment and treatment unit (UATU) compared with the current standard of care when diagnosing and treating abnormal uterine bleeding in women.
methodsWe performed a cost-effectiveness analysis and developed a probabilistic decision tree model to simulate the total costs and outcomes of women receiving outpatient UATU or usual care over a 1-year time horizon (Apr. 1, 2014, to Mar. 31, 2017) at a tertiary care hospital in Ontario, Canada. Probabilities, resource use and time to diagnosis and treatment were obtained from a retrospective chart review of 200 randomly selected women who presented with abnormal uterine bleeding. Results were expressed as overall cost and time savings per patient. Costs are reported in 2018 Canadian dollars.
resultsCompared with usual care, care in the UATU was associated with a decrease in overall cost ($1332, 95% confidence interval [CI] -$1742 to -$1008) and a decrease in overall time to treatment (-75, 95% CI -89 to -63, d). The point at which the UATU would no longer be cost saving is if the additional cost to operate and maintain the UATU is greater than $1600 per patient.
interpretationFrom the perspective of Canada's health care system, an outpatient UATU is more cost effective than usual care and saves time. Future studies should focus on the relative efficacy of a UATU and the total budget required to operate and maintain a UATU.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.