Home > Riviste > The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging > Fascicoli precedenti > The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2000 Giugno;44(2) > The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2000 Giugno;44(2):121-37

ULTIMO FASCICOLOTHE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND MOLECULAR IMAGING

Rivista di Medicina Nucleare e Imaging Molecolare


A Journal on Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Affiliated to the Society of Radiopharmaceutical Sciences and to the International Research Group of Immunoscintigraphy
Indexed/Abstracted in: Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,413


eTOC

 

  ECONOMICS OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Guest Editor: Gambhir S. S.


The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2000 Giugno;44(2):121-37

lingua: Inglese

Economic evaluation studies in nuclear medicine: a methodological review of the literature

Gambhir S. S. *, Schwimmer J.

From the Crump Institute for Biological Imaging and Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology the Division of Nuclear Medicine
*Department of Biomathematics UCLA School of Medicine Los Angeles, California, USA


FULL TEXT  ESTRATTI


Background. The grow­ing ­need for eval­u­a­tion of the util­ity of new nucle­ar med­i­cine tech­nol­o­gies has ­spawned a few eco­nom­ic stud­ies rang­ing ­from pre­lim­i­nary indi­ca­tions of ­cost sav­ings to com­plete deci­sion anal­y­sis mod­els incor­po­rat­ing ­costs and qual­ity of ­life. The objec­tive of the cur­rent ­study was to eval­u­ate the method­o­log­i­cal qual­ity of eco­nom­ic anal­y­ses of nucle­ar med­i­cine pro­ce­dures ­which tar­get­ed ­cost-effec­tive­ness or ­cost-util­ity ­issues pub­lished in the med­i­cal lit­er­a­ture dur­ing the ­years 1985-1999.
Methods. A com­pu­ter­ized lit­er­a­ture ­search was ­used to iden­ti­fy orig­i­nal inves­ti­ga­tions ­from the med­i­cal lit­er­a­ture ­which includ­ed an eco­nom­ic anal­y­sis of a nucle­ar med­i­cine pro­ce­dure. Each eco­nom­ic anal­y­sis arti­cle was eval­u­at­ed by two inde­pen­dent review­ers for adher­ence to ten accept­ed method­o­log­i­cal cri­te­ria.
Results. Of the 29 arti­cles meet­ing the ­search cri­te­ria, ­only six (21%) con­formed to all ten method­o­log­i­cal cri­te­ria.
Conclusions. Published eco­nom­ic anal­y­ses of nucle­ar med­i­cine pro­ce­dures usu­al­ly do not ­meet accept­ed method­o­log­i­cal stan­dards and ­could be sig­nif­i­cant­ly ­improved to ­achieve over­all bet­ter qual­ity rel­a­tive to sim­i­lar anal­y­ses in the lit­er­a­ture ­from oth­er med­i­cal ­fields. Continued improve­ment in the num­ber and qual­ity of eco­nom­ic stud­ies is crit­i­cal­ly need­ed for the ­future com­pet­i­tive­ness of nucle­ar med­i­cine stud­ies.

inizio pagina