Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2024658580> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 81 of
81
with 100 items per page.
- W2024658580 endingPage "222" @default.
- W2024658580 startingPage "217" @default.
- W2024658580 abstract "Background and Study Aims: A number of endoscopic antireflux therapies (EATs) have emerged as potential nonmedical treatment options for patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Concerns about clinical efficacy and costs have given rise to debate about their role in GERD management. The costs of laparoscopic fundoplication (LF) were compared with the costs of EAT when used in a sequential strategy that reserves the option of LF for EAT failure. Methods: A simple mathematical criterion of direct medical costs was applied. Published articles concerning EAT were reviewed to assess its effectiveness, durability and costs, in order to estimate the parameters of the model. The costs of EAT and LF were evaluated from the perspective of a German third-party payer. Only direct medical costs were considered. Results: Assuming that EAT has no impact on potential LF later on, the outcome of both strategies (LF, or EAT first with LF in case of failure of EAT) is identical and preference is a simple question of costs. The sequential strategy in nonmedical GERD treatment would be preferable if the long-term relief rate with EAT exceeds the ratio of the cost of EAT to the cost of LF. Long-term success rates of EAT do not exceed 0.65. At current prices EAT is clearly not cost-effective in Germany. Conclusion: Our simple criterion indicates that EAT would only be cost-effective and beneficial in a sequential strategy if the costs of EAT were to be decreased to around 30 % of current retail prices. However, long-term studies and randomized controlled trials are necessary to finally determine the role of EAT in GERD treatment, and the preference may change in either direction." @default.
- W2024658580 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W2024658580 creator A5000364178 @default.
- W2024658580 creator A5003060336 @default.
- W2024658580 creator A5026240360 @default.
- W2024658580 creator A5038360062 @default.
- W2024658580 creator A5049518897 @default.
- W2024658580 creator A5079577958 @default.
- W2024658580 creator A5086233231 @default.
- W2024658580 date "2005-02-24" @default.
- W2024658580 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
- W2024658580 title "Are Endoscopic Antireflux Therapies Cost-Effective Compared with Laparoscopic Fundoplication?" @default.
- W2024658580 doi "https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2005-860996" @default.
- W2024658580 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15731937" @default.
- W2024658580 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
- W2024658580 type Work @default.
- W2024658580 sameAs 2024658580 @default.
- W2024658580 citedByCount "3" @default.
- W2024658580 countsByYear W20246585802018 @default.
- W2024658580 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2024658580 hasAuthorship W2024658580A5000364178 @default.
- W2024658580 hasAuthorship W2024658580A5003060336 @default.
- W2024658580 hasAuthorship W2024658580A5026240360 @default.
- W2024658580 hasAuthorship W2024658580A5038360062 @default.
- W2024658580 hasAuthorship W2024658580A5049518897 @default.
- W2024658580 hasAuthorship W2024658580A5079577958 @default.
- W2024658580 hasAuthorship W2024658580A5086233231 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C121955636 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C127454912 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C160735492 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C177713679 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C18903297 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C2777014526 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C2779134260 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C3019354653 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C43270747 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C50522688 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C6964187 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C121955636 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C126322002 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C127454912 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C144133560 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C160735492 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C162324750 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C177713679 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C18903297 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C2777014526 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C2779134260 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C3019354653 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C43270747 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C50522688 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C6964187 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C71924100 @default.
- W2024658580 hasConceptScore W2024658580C86803240 @default.
- W2024658580 hasIssue "03" @default.
- W2024658580 hasLocation W20246585801 @default.
- W2024658580 hasLocation W20246585802 @default.
- W2024658580 hasOpenAccess W2024658580 @default.
- W2024658580 hasPrimaryLocation W20246585801 @default.
- W2024658580 hasRelatedWork W1657708792 @default.
- W2024658580 hasRelatedWork W2137205854 @default.
- W2024658580 hasRelatedWork W2370191009 @default.
- W2024658580 hasRelatedWork W2387679427 @default.
- W2024658580 hasRelatedWork W2473896675 @default.
- W2024658580 hasRelatedWork W2613384862 @default.
- W2024658580 hasRelatedWork W2773413984 @default.
- W2024658580 hasRelatedWork W2992861500 @default.
- W2024658580 hasRelatedWork W3097175833 @default.
- W2024658580 hasRelatedWork W40429620 @default.
- W2024658580 hasVolume "37" @default.
- W2024658580 isParatext "false" @default.
- W2024658580 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W2024658580 magId "2024658580" @default.
- W2024658580 workType "article" @default.