Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36793078›Full record

ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2023

Cost-effectiveness analysis of coronary arteries bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) through drug stent in iran: a comparative study.

NourolHoda Fakhrzad, Mohsen Barouni, Reza Goudarzi, Javad Kojuri, Yunes Jahani, Mohammad Tasavon Gholamhoseini

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Treatment charges for acute coronary syndrome: A retrospective analysis.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

NourolHoda FakhrzadHealth Services Management Research Center, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.
Mohsen BarouniModeling in Health Research Center, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran. Mohsenbarooni@gmail.com.
Reza GoudarziHealth Services Management Research Center, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.
Javad KojuriChairman of Education Development Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Yunes JahaniDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.
Mohammad Tasavon GholamhoseiniHealth Services Management Research Center, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.
Kerman University of Medical Sciences · IRShiraz University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCost-effectiveness analysis plays a key role in evaluating health systems and services. Coronary artery disease is one of the primary health concerns worldwide. This study sought to compare the cost-effectiveness of Coronary Arteries Bypass Grafting (CABG) and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) through drug stent using Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY) index.

methodsThis is a cohort study involving all patients undergoing CABG and PCI through drug stent in south of Iran. A total of 410 patients were randomly selected to be included in the study. Data were gathered using SF-36, SAQ and a form for cost data from the patients' perspective. The data were analyzed descriptively and inferentially. Considering the analysis of cost-effectiveness, Markov Model was initially developed using TreeAge Pro 2020. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

resultsCompared with the group treated with PCI, the total cost of interventions was higher in the CABG group ($102,103.8 vs $71,401.22) and the cost of lost productivity ($20,228.68 vs $7632.11), while the cost of hospitalization was lower in CABG ($67,567.1 vs $49,660.97). The cost of hotel stay and travel ($6967.82 vs $2520.12) and the cost of medication ($7340.18 vs $11,588.01) was lower in CABG. From the patients' perspective and SAQ instrument, CABG was cost-saving, with a reduction of $16,581 for every increase in effectiveness. Based on patients' perspective and SF-36 instrument, CABG was cost-saving, with a reduction of $34,543 for every increase in effectiveness.

conclusionIn the same indications, CABG intervention leads to more resource savings.

Indexed as

Costs-effectivenessMarkov modelQuality-Adjusted Life YearsSeattle angina questionnaireShort form-36 questionnaire

Identifiers

PMID36793078
PMCPMC9930214
OpenAlexW4321004503

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.