An economic evaluation of perioperative enteral nutrition in patients undergoing colorectal surgery (SANICS II study)

Madhuri Pattamatta, Silvia M. A. A. Evers, Boudewijn J. J. Smeets, Emmeline G. Peters, Misha D. P. Luyer, Mickael Hiligsmann*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Aims: The objective of this (trial based) economic evaluation was to assess, from a societal perspective, the cost-effectiveness of perioperative enteral nutrition compared with standard care in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Materials and methods: Alongside the SANICS II randomized controlled trial, global quality-of-life, utilities (measured by EQ-5D-5L), healthcare costs, production losses, and patient and family costs were assessed at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) (i.e. cost per increased global quality-of-life score or quality-adjusted life year [QALY] gained) and cost effectiveness acceptability curves were visualized. Results: In total, 265 patients were included in the original trial (n = 132 in the perioperative enteral nutrition group and n = 133 in the standard care group). At 6 months, global quality-of-life (83 vs 83, p = .357) did not differ significantly between the groups. The mean total societal costs for the intervention and standard care groups were euro14,673 and euro11,974, respectively, but did not reach statistical significance (p = .109). The intervention resulted in an ICER of -euro6,276 per point increase in the global quality of life score. The gain in QALY was marginal (0.003), with an additional cost of euro2,941, and the ICUR (Incremental cost utility ratio) was estimated at euro980,333. Limitations: The cost elements for all the participating centers reflect the reference prices from the Netherlands. Patient-reported questionnaires may have resulted in recall bias. Sample size was limited by exclusion of patients who did not complete questionnaires for at least at two time points. A power analysis based on costs and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) was not performed. The economic impact could not be analyzed at 1 month post-operatively where the effects could potentially be higher. Conclusions: This study suggests that perioperative nutrition is not beneficial for the patients in terms of quality-of-life and is not cost-effective.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)238-244
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Medical Economics
Volume22
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 4 Mar 2019

Keywords

  • Colorectal surgery
  • perioperative enteral nutrition
  • cost-effectiveness
  • quality-of-life
  • economic evaluation
  • QUALITY-OF-LIFE
  • POSTOPERATIVE ILEUS
  • ANASTOMOTIC LEAKAGE
  • COMPLICATIONS
  • BURDEN
  • IMPACT

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'An economic evaluation of perioperative enteral nutrition in patients undergoing colorectal surgery (SANICS II study)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this