ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2026
Costs of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) and its potential contribution to quality-adjusted life years: a mixed-methods study protocol.
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVenovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) is a mechanical life support modality used in patients with severe respiratory failure. Despite rising case numbers worldwide, costs are substantial, while patient-centered outcomes, particularly survival and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), remain uncertain. High complication and mortality rates also persist. Limited financial budgets, human resources, and treatment capacities in healthcare systems require critical evaluation of whether continued use of this resource-intensive intervention at the current scale is sustainable and ethically justifiable. This study aims to provide further insight into this issue and to support healthcare decision-making by offering a structured economic and ethical framework for evaluating VV-ECMO, particularly regarding resource allocation, proportionality of costs, and the justification of its use in high-cost intensive care.
methodsThis mixed-methods study consists of two parts. Part A includes two systematic literature reviews. The first examines total and daily in-hospital costs per patient, as well as outcomes measured in QALYs for adult patients supported with VV-ECMO across multiple countries between 2005 and 2024. The second aim is to identify established interventions with confirmed QALY gain that can subsequently be used as comparators for VV-ECMO. Part B evaluates the results according to the principles of medical ethics: beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice. DISCUSSION: Given limited financial, personnel, and treatment capacities in healthcare systems, the question of how highly resource-intensive interventions such as VV-ECMO can be justified has increasing clinical, economic, and ethical relevance. By linking cost-related outcomes with a structured ethical evaluation, this study aims to contribute to a more differentiated discussion of whether and under which conditions VV-ECMO may be considered proportionate and justifiable within resource-constrained healthcare settings. Expected challenges include data availability and quality, differences in reported charges versus costs, and variation in healthcare systems, reimbursement structures, and national decision-making frameworks. These factors represent inherent limitations of international comparisons. The analysis is therefore intended as a comparative and contextual assessment rather than a formal cost-effectiveness evaluation within a single national reimbursement framework, particularly as no officially established uniform willingness-to-pay threshold per QALY exists in Germany. CLINICAL
trial registrationNot applicable. This study does not involve interventional clinical research. The protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/24ky5 ).
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.