Are Medical Devices Cost-Effective?

James D. Chambers (), Madison C. Silver, Flora C. Berklein, Joshua T. Cohen and Peter J. Neumann
Additional contact information
James D. Chambers: Tufts Medical Center
Madison C. Silver: Tufts Medical Center
Flora C. Berklein: Tufts Medical Center
Joshua T. Cohen: Tufts Medical Center
Peter J. Neumann: Tufts Medical Center

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 2022, vol. 20, issue 2, No 9, 235-241

Abstract: Abstract Objective Medical devices can offer important therapeutic advances but, as for any medical interventions, there are questions about their costs and benefits. We examined health benefits and costs for pre-market approved (PMA) devices approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (1999–2015), grouping them by generic category (e.g., drug-eluting stents) and indication. Methods We searched PubMed for incremental health gain estimates [measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)] and incremental costs for each device category compared to previously available treatments. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios by dividing the average incremental costs by the average incremental QALY gains. In sensitivity analysis, we repeated the analysis when excluding industry-funded studies. Results We identified at least one relevant cost-utility or comparative-effectiveness study for 88 devices (15.9% of non-cosmetic devices approved from 1999 to 2015), and at least one device across 53 (26.2%) generic categories. The median (mean) incremental cost across generic device categories was $1701 ($13,320). The median (mean) incremental health gain across generic device categories was 0.13 (0.46) QALYs. We found that cost-effectiveness ratios for 36 of 53 (68%) and 43 of 53 (81%) device categories fell below (were more favorable than) $50,000 and $150,000 per QALY, respectively. Results were roughly similar when we excluded industry-funded studies. Conclusions We found that roughly one-quarter of the major PMA medical device categories have published cost-effectiveness evidence accessible through a large, publicly available database. Available evidence suggests that devices generally offer good value, as judged relative to established cost-effectiveness benchmarks.

Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-021-00698-6 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:20:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s40258-021-00698-6

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40258

DOI: 10.1007/s40258-021-00698-6

Access Statistics for this article

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson

More articles in Applied Health Economics and Health Policy from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().