ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2025
Expensive today but cheaper tomorrow: lifetime costs of an active middle ear implant compared to alternative treatment options.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2025. 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.
- Complex intervention for MS patients in Germany - can it be cost-saving for the society?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhen choosing between different treatment options, implants often appear too costly. However, this perspective does not take future costs into account. This article evaluates lifetime costs for different surgical interventions to treat hearing loss.
methodsThe analysis focused on three groups from the perspective of health insurers. Group 1 comprises patients who have only been implanted with a middle ear implant. Patients in Group 2 had already undergone middle ear surgery to improve hearing prior to the implantation of a middle ear implant. Group 3 consists of patients who were treated exclusively with hearing-improvement surgeries (no implant). The lifetime costs were calculated using the Monte Carlo simulation. The inputs were based on medical data from a maximum-care hospital and data from the German healthcare system.
resultsBased on an average observation period of 26.73 years, the lifetime costs amounted to 28,325€ for group 1, 32,187€ for group 2 and 28,381€ for group 3. While the mean values between groups 1 and 3 appear comparable, group 1 has a significantly lower standard deviation (G1 vs. G3: 6120€ vs. 10,327€). DISCUSSION/
conclusionChoosing a treatment option can be a complex medical decision and impose a substantial economic burden for the statutory health insurance. Hence, treatment decisions should be patient-centred at first but also including a shared-decision making on economic feasibility, whether proposed treatment alternatives are likely to be successful and economically reasonable.
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.