A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Sentio Bone Conduction Hearing Implant System in the Australian Healthcare Setting.

Q2 Medicine
Journal of market access & health policy Pub Date : 2026-01-27 eCollection Date: 2026-03-01 DOI:10.3390/jmahp14010008
Magnus Värendh, Ida Haggren, Helén Lagerkvist, Maria Åberg Håkansson, Jonas Hjelmgren
{"title":"A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Sentio Bone Conduction Hearing Implant System in the Australian Healthcare Setting.","authors":"Magnus Värendh, Ida Haggren, Helén Lagerkvist, Maria Åberg Håkansson, Jonas Hjelmgren","doi":"10.3390/jmahp14010008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Bone conduction hearing implant systems (BCHIs) are established treatments for patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss or single-sided deafness when conventional hearing aids are unsuitable. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the active transcutaneous system Sentio versus a similar system, i.e., Osia in an Australian setting. Scenario analyses also compared Sentio to other systems, i.e., Ponto and Baha Attract. A Markov cohort model was adapted from a previously published source to reflect Australian practice, incorporating device acquisition, surgery, maintenance, battery replacement and adverse event management over a 15-year horizon from a healthcare perspective. Effectiveness inputs were derived from published evidence using a naïve indirect comparison. Extensive sensitivity analyses and external validation tested robustness. In the base case, Sentio was associated with lower costs and a small modelled incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gain versus Osia. Scenario analyses confirmed cost-effectiveness relative to Ponto and Baha Attract, with outcomes below the Australian willingness-to-pay threshold. Health state utility, device price and reimplantation assumptions were the most influential drivers, yet Sentio remained cost-effective in over 95% of simulations. These findings support Sentio as a clinically and economically efficient BCHI in Australia and highlight the need for direct utility and long-term durability data.</p>","PeriodicalId":73811,"journal":{"name":"Journal of market access & health policy","volume":"14 1","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12921733/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of market access & health policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp14010008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Bone conduction hearing implant systems (BCHIs) are established treatments for patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss or single-sided deafness when conventional hearing aids are unsuitable. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the active transcutaneous system Sentio versus a similar system, i.e., Osia in an Australian setting. Scenario analyses also compared Sentio to other systems, i.e., Ponto and Baha Attract. A Markov cohort model was adapted from a previously published source to reflect Australian practice, incorporating device acquisition, surgery, maintenance, battery replacement and adverse event management over a 15-year horizon from a healthcare perspective. Effectiveness inputs were derived from published evidence using a naïve indirect comparison. Extensive sensitivity analyses and external validation tested robustness. In the base case, Sentio was associated with lower costs and a small modelled incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gain versus Osia. Scenario analyses confirmed cost-effectiveness relative to Ponto and Baha Attract, with outcomes below the Australian willingness-to-pay threshold. Health state utility, device price and reimplantation assumptions were the most influential drivers, yet Sentio remained cost-effective in over 95% of simulations. These findings support Sentio as a clinically and economically efficient BCHI in Australia and highlight the need for direct utility and long-term durability data.

Sentio骨传导听力植入系统在澳大利亚医疗机构的成本-效果分析。
骨传导听力植入系统(BCHIs)是传统助听器不适合的传导性或混合性听力损失或单侧耳聋患者的既定治疗方法。本研究评估了主动经皮系统Sentio与类似系统(即澳大利亚环境中的Osia)的成本效益。场景分析还将Sentio与其他系统(如Ponto和Baha attraction)进行了比较。马尔可夫队列模型改编自先前发表的来源,以反映澳大利亚的实践,从医疗保健的角度出发,将设备购置、手术、维护、电池更换和不良事件管理纳入15年的视野。有效性输入来自已发表的证据,使用naïve间接比较。广泛的敏感性分析和外部验证测试了稳健性。在基本情况下,与Osia相比,Sentio具有较低的成本和较小的模型增量质量调整寿命年(QALYs)增益。情景分析证实了相对于Ponto和Baha attraction的成本效益,其结果低于澳大利亚的支付意愿阈值。健康状态效用、设备价格和重新植入假设是最具影响力的驱动因素,但在95%以上的模拟中,Sentio仍然具有成本效益。这些研究结果支持Sentio在澳大利亚作为临床和经济有效的BCHI,并强调了直接效用和长期耐久性数据的必要性。
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
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书