| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Health Policy and Practice |
1 From the Department of Radiology, Decision Analysis and Technology Assessment Group (P.M.M., G.S.G.) and the Computer-Assisted Diagnostics Laboratory (G.J.H.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Zero Emerson Pl, Ste 2H, Boston, MA 02114 and the Program on the Economic Evaluation of Medical Technology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Mass (S.S.A., P.J.N.). Received October 20, 1999; revision requested November 19; revision received December 16; accepted January 12, 2000. Address correspondence to G.S.G. (e-mail: gazelle@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu).
PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of functional neuroimaging in the work-up of patients at specialized Alzheimer disease clinics.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision model was used to calculate costs and benefits (in quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) that accrued to hypothetical cohorts of patients at presentation to an Alzheimer disease center. Sensitivity analysis was performed to examine the effects of diagnostic test characteristics, therapeutic efficacy, disease severity, and costs on cost-effectiveness.
RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of dynamic susceptibility contrast material–enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging was $479,500 per QALY (compared with the usual diagnostic work-up), while visual or quantitative single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) was dominated (higher costs, lower effectiveness) by the usual diagnostic work-up. These results depend critically on the sensitivity and specificity of the standard diagnostic work-up, the effectiveness of drug treatment, and the disease severity. Varying these parameters resulted in estimates of incremental cost-effectiveness for dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MR imaging of $24,680 to $8.6 million per QALY. SPECT either was dominated by the usual diagnostic work-up or had cost-effectiveness ratios of $180,200 to $6 million per QALY.
CONCLUSION: The addition of functional neuroimaging to the usual diagnostic regimen at Alzheimer disease clinics is not cost-effective given the effectiveness of currently available therapies.
Index terms: Alzheimer disease, 10.83 • Cost-effectiveness • Magnetic resonance, (MR), utilization
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  G. S. Gazelle, P. M. McMahon, U. Siebert, and M. T. Beinfeld Cost-effectiveness Analysis in the Assessment of Diagnostic Imaging Technologies Radiology, May 1, 2005; 235(2): 361 - 370. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. M. McMahon, S. S. Araki, E. A. Sandberg, P. J. Neumann, and G. S. Gazelle Cost-Effectiveness of PET in the Diagnosis of Alzheimer Disease Radiology, August 1, 2003; 228(2): 515 - 522. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. R. Petrella, R. E. Coleman, and P. M. Doraiswamy Neuroimaging and Early Diagnosis of Alzheimer Disease: A Look to the Future Radiology, February 1, 2003; 226(2): 315 - 336. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. H.S. Silverman, S. S. Gambhir, H.-W. C. Huang, J. Schwimmer, S. Kim, G. W. Small, J. Chodosh, J. Czernin, and M. E. Phelps Evaluating Early Dementia With and Without Assessment of Regional Cerebral Metabolism by PET: A Comparison of Predicted Costs and Benefits J. Nucl. Med., February 1, 2002; 43(2): 253 - 266. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. J. Neumann, J. K. Hammitt, C. Mueller, H. M. Fillit, J. Hill, N. A. Tetteh, and K. S. Kosik Public Attitudes About Genetic Testing For Alzheimer's Disease Health Aff., September 1, 2001; 20(5): 252 - 264. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| RADIOLOGY | RADIOGRAPHICS | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |
