ArticleGastrointestinal endoscopy2024
Valuing innovative endoscopic techniques: hemostatic powder for the treatment of GI tumor bleeding.
Article in Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsAccess to new endoscopic treatment modalities often depends on price. To resolve this gap and therefore help to ensure that care delivery can occur on a clinical basis, we aimed to establish the value to insurers of novel hemostatic powder to treat GI tumor bleeding.
methodsA decision-analytic model developed to assess the impact of endoscopic intervention on the risk of 30-day readmission for GI bleeding from an insurer perspective was adapted to assess GI tumor bleeding with hemostatic powder or standard endoscopic therapy. Costs were derived from Medicare populations. Outcomes were derived from a recent multicenter randomized clinical trial.
resultsCosts ranged from $651 to $1613 to treat upper GI tumor bleeding and from $531 to $1014 to treat lower GI tumor bleeding based on risk reduction in 30-day hospital readmission for recurrent bleeding. These valuations should represent medical device and incremental facility costs in addition to incremental physician and staff time.
conclusionsCoverage for novel endoscopic hemostatic powder therapy seems cost-saving to insurers.
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.