Economic Evaluation of Acute Appendicitis Therapeutic Interventions: A Systematic Review

IF 2.1 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Hasan Abolghasem Gorji, Sajad Moeini, Mohmmad Veysi Sheikhrobat, Aziz Rezapour, Aghdas Souresrafil, Mohammad Barzegar
{"title":"Economic Evaluation of Acute Appendicitis Therapeutic Interventions: A Systematic Review","authors":"Hasan Abolghasem Gorji,&nbsp;Sajad Moeini,&nbsp;Mohmmad Veysi Sheikhrobat,&nbsp;Aziz Rezapour,&nbsp;Aghdas Souresrafil,&nbsp;Mohammad Barzegar","doi":"10.1002/hsr2.70815","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background and Aims</h3>\n \n <p>Acute appendicitis (AA) is a prevalent cause of lower abdominal pain, often leading patients to seek emergency department care, particularly among young individuals. The present study aimed to systematically review cost-effectiveness studies focusing on therapeutic interventions for AA.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we systematically reviewed economic evaluations of AA treatments published between 2000 and 2020. We searched multiple databases, including Cochrane, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The studies included in this review were assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) checklist, and cost data were standardized to 2022 US dollars.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Out of the 53 screened studies, 11 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The studies’ average QHES score was of high quality (0.87). Most studies were from the payer's perspective and the health system (four studies each). Five studies were based on the decision tree model, and three were based on the Markov model. Four studies were conducted on children. Of the 11 studies reviewed, five support the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopy, five support the cost-effectiveness of antibiotic therapy, and one supports the cost-effectiveness of open appendectomy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Based on the findings of this study, laparoscopic therapeutic intervention, compared to open appendectomy, can be more cost-effective for the treatment of patients with AA.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36518,"journal":{"name":"Health Science Reports","volume":"8 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hsr2.70815","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Science Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hsr2.70815","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Aims

Acute appendicitis (AA) is a prevalent cause of lower abdominal pain, often leading patients to seek emergency department care, particularly among young individuals. The present study aimed to systematically review cost-effectiveness studies focusing on therapeutic interventions for AA.

Method

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we systematically reviewed economic evaluations of AA treatments published between 2000 and 2020. We searched multiple databases, including Cochrane, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The studies included in this review were assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) checklist, and cost data were standardized to 2022 US dollars.

Results

Out of the 53 screened studies, 11 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The studies’ average QHES score was of high quality (0.87). Most studies were from the payer's perspective and the health system (four studies each). Five studies were based on the decision tree model, and three were based on the Markov model. Four studies were conducted on children. Of the 11 studies reviewed, five support the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopy, five support the cost-effectiveness of antibiotic therapy, and one supports the cost-effectiveness of open appendectomy.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of this study, laparoscopic therapeutic intervention, compared to open appendectomy, can be more cost-effective for the treatment of patients with AA.

Abstract Image

急性阑尾炎治疗干预的经济评价:系统综述
背景和目的急性阑尾炎(AA)是下腹部疼痛的常见原因,经常导致患者寻求急诊治疗,特别是在年轻人中。本研究旨在系统地回顾有关AA治疗干预的成本-效果研究。方法根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,我们系统地回顾了2000年至2020年间发表的AA治疗的经济评价。我们检索了多个数据库,包括Cochrane、PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science。本综述中纳入的研究使用卫生经济研究质量(QHES)检查表进行评估,成本数据标准化为2022美元。结果53项筛选研究中,11项符合纳入标准。研究的平均QHES评分为高质量(0.87)。大多数研究是从支付方和卫生系统的角度进行的(各4项研究)。5项研究基于决策树模型,3项研究基于马尔可夫模型。对儿童进行了四项研究。在回顾的11项研究中,5项支持腹腔镜手术的成本效益,5项支持抗生素治疗的成本效益,1项支持开放式阑尾切除术的成本效益。结论基于本研究的结果,腹腔镜治疗干预与开放式阑尾切除术相比,对AA患者的治疗更具成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health Science Reports
Health Science Reports Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
458
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信