Open AccessCanadian cost data associated with treating overactive bladder is lacking
Author(s) -
Dylan Viste,
Carly Barton,
Kevin Carlson,
Richard Baverstock,
R. Trafford Crump
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
canadian urological association journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.477
H-Index - 38
eISSN - 1920-1214
pISSN - 1911-6470
DOI - 10.5489/cuaj.7500
Subject(s) - context (archaeology) , generalizability theory , guideline , medicine , overactive bladder , health care , cost–benefit analysis , cost database , systematic review , grey literature , medline , alternative medicine , psychology , political science , geography , computer science , developmental psychology , archaeology , pathology , law , database
Cost-effectiveness analysis forms an integral part of the approval process for new medical treatments in Canada, including drug and non-drug technologies. This study’s primary objective was to identify peer-reviewed studies that report Canadian-specific cost data for treating overactive bladder (OAB) based on the Canadian Urological Association (CUA) guidelines. A secondary objective was to identify studies that report cost data from other healthcare jurisdictions that could be generalizable to the Canadian context.Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the published peer-reviewed literature. We included studies from Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries, excluding the U.S., published in English since January 2009.Results: From 165 abstracts identified in our initial search, 18 studies were ultimately included for analysis. This included one Canadian-based study reporting costs in Canadian dollars, all related to second-line treatments. The other studies were primarily from Europe, reporting costs in Euros or U.K. pounds. There were no studies reporting costs for first-line treatments. Gaps in costs for select second-line and third-line treatments recommended by the CUA were also identified.Conclusions: Canadian-specific cost data for OAB treatments published in the peer-reviewed literature is limited to a single study reporting costs for only a few second-line treatments sourced from a single province over 10 years ago. Cost data from other healthcare jurisdictions are available, but the generalizability of costs associated with third-line treatments is questionable.