Thopaz+ Portable Digital System for Managing Chest Drains: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance.
Journal
Applied health economics and health policy
ISSN: 1179-1896
Titre abrégé: Appl Health Econ Health Policy
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101150314
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2019
06 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
24
1
2019
medline:
7
7
2020
entrez:
24
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Thopaz+ portable digital system was evaluated by the Medical Technologies Advisory Committee (MTAC) of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). The manufacturer, Medela, submitted a case for the adoption of Thopaz+ that was critiqued by Cedar, on behalf of NICE. Due to a lack of clinical evidence submitted by the manufacturer, Cedar carried out its own literature search. Clinical evidence showed that the use of Thopaz+ led to shorter drainage times, a shorter hospital stay, lower rates of chest drain re-insertion and higher patient satisfaction compared to conventional chest drainage when used in patients following pulmonary resection. One comparative study of the use of Thopaz+ in patients with spontaneous pneumothorax was identified and showed shorter drainage times and a shorter length of hospital stay compared to conventional drainage. No economic evidence was submitted by the manufacturer, but a simple decision tree model was included. The model was improved by Cedar and showed a cost saving of £111.33 per patient when Thopaz+ was used instead of conventional chest drainage in patients following pulmonary resection. Cedar also carried out a sub-group analysis of the use of Thopaz+ instead of conventional drainage in patients with pneumothorax where a cost saving of £550.90 was observed. The main cost driver for the model and sub-group analysis was length of stay. The sub-group analysis was based on a single comparative study. However, the MTAC received details of an unpublished audit of Thopaz+ which confirmed its efficacy in treating patients with pneumothorax. Thopaz+ received a positive recommendation in Medical Technologies Guidance 37.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30671917
doi: 10.1007/s40258-019-00461-y
pii: 10.1007/s40258-019-00461-y
pmc: PMC6535154
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
285-294Références
Ann Thorac Surg. 2014 Aug;98(2):490-6; discussion 496-7
pubmed: 24906602
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011 Apr 21;6:59
pubmed: 21510897
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2012 Oct;15(4):622-6
pubmed: 22753431
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 Sep;62(6):509-15
pubmed: 24297633
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2011 Nov;13(5):490-3; discussion 493
pubmed: 21852268
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015 Nov;150(5):1243-9
pubmed: 26409729
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015 Dec;48(6):893-8; discussion 898
pubmed: 25605828
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2013 May;43(5):899-904
pubmed: 23024236
Ann Thorac Surg. 2016 Sep;102(3):955-961
pubmed: 27234573
BMJ Open Respir Res. 2014 Nov 04;1(1):e000033
pubmed: 25478182
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2012 Sep 1;10(5):295-7
pubmed: 22909081
Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016 Dec 20;22(6):354-358
pubmed: 27885215
Cir Esp. 2010 Jun;87(6):385-9
pubmed: 20452581
J Bras Pneumol. 2016 Nov-Dec;42(6):444-446
pubmed: 28117476