Observational studyFrontiers in public health2026
Budget impact analysis of deep brain stimulation devices with different longevity in Parkinson's disease: insights from real-world data.
Observational study in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a viable treatment option for Parkinson's disease (PD) based on modulation of brain networks by electrical stimulation powered by implantable pulse generators (IPGs). Commercially available IPGs are either rechargeable (R) or non-rechargeable (NR). A budget impact analysis was developed to compare costs of the two options in PD-DBS patients, focusing on avoided battery replacements, associated complications, hospitalization rates. Methods: The study was conducted in two phases: an observational, single-center, retrospective analysis from 2005 to 2023 of 94 PD-DBS patients, followed by a second phase in which the economic data obtained were used to build a budget impact analysis (BIA) comparing the two different options. Results: Data from 47 PD-DBS patients with NR and 47 with R-IPGs were examined. BIA was calculated on a single patient with a 15-year and 25-year R-IPG. The higher initial cost of R devices compared with NR devices is offset by the absence of device replacements. This results in an estimated savings of €38,333 per patient with a 15-year R-IPG and €71,584 with a 25-year IPG. Conclusions: BIA predicts that the cost savings with a long-lasting R-IPG up to 25 years is cost effective compared with NR, regardless of age and life expectancy.
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.