Skip to main content

Table 2 Averages economic evaluations (univariate analyses)

From: Using meta-regression analyses in addition to conventional systematic review methods to examine the variation in cost-effectiveness results – a case study

 

Total (CEAs & CUAs) (N = 16)

CEAs (N = 9)

CUAs (N = 11)

 

Average ± SD

Average ± SD

Average ± SD

Incremental outcomes

   

 Incremental costs

€982 ± €894

  

 Incremental QALYs

0.0042 ± 0.008

  

 Incremental repeat revascularization avoided

0.0958 ± 0.0521

  

Input parameters

   

 Number of stents per procedure

1.503 ± 0.367

1.382 ± 0.355

1.540 ± 0.364

 Price of DES stent

€ 1,654 ± € 390

€ 1,912 ± € 672

€ 1,614 ± € 307

 Price of BMS stent

€ 555 ± € 166

€ 670 ± € 307

€ 534 ± € 114

 Price difference between stents

€ 1,085 ± € 337

€ 1,189 ± € 336

€ 1,056 ± € 331

 Price of DES procedure (incl. stents)

€ 6,328 ± € 2,509

€ 7,811 ± € 1,475

€ 5,998 ± € 2,573

 Price of BMS procedure (incl. stents)

€ 4,442 ± € 2,195

€ 6,259 ± € 1,536

€ 4,160 ± € 2,138

 Cost difference between the procedures

€ 1,787 ± € 686

€ 1,551 ± € 805

€ 1,840 ± € 647

 Probability restenosis BMS

0.142 ± 0.076

0.148 ± 0.055

0.140 ± 0.081

 Probability restenosis DES

0.064 ± 0.038

0.056 ± 0.027

0.068 ± 0.041

 Relative risk reduction DES vs. BMS

0.484 ± 0.204

0.578 ± 0.214

0.449 ± 0.189

Quality (0-100 %)*

   

 Total

59.5 ± 15.4

  

 Structure

62.5 ± 16.1

  

 Data

56.7 ± 21.6

  

 Consistency

55.1 ± 20.8

  
  1. * N = 16 studies
  2. CEA cost-effectiveness analysis, CUA cost-utility analysis