Photodynamic therapy for actinic keratoses: A randomized prospective non-sponsored cost-effectiveness study of daylightmediated treatment compared with light-emitting diode treatment

14Citations
Citations of this article
56Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy (DL-PDT) is considered as effective as conventional PDT using artificial light (light-emitting diode (LED)-PDT) for treatment of actinic keratoses (AK). This randomized prospective non-sponsored study assessed the cost-effectiveness of DL-PDT compared with LED-PDT. Seventy patients with 210 AKs were randomized to DL-PDT or LED-PDT groups. Effectiveness was assessed at 6 months. The costs included societal costs and private costs, including the time patients spent in treatment. Results are presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The total costs per patient were significantly lower for DL-PDT (€132) compared with LED-PDT (€170), giving a cost saving of €38 (p = 0.022). The estimated probabilities for patients’ complete response were 0.429 for DL-PDT and 0.686 for LED-PDT; a difference in probability of being healed of 0.257. ICER showed a monetary gain of €147 per unit of effectiveness lost. DL-PDT is less costly and less effective than LED-PDT. In terms of cost-effectiveness analysis, DL-PDT provides lower value for money compared with LED-PDT.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Neittaanmäkiperttu, N., Grönroos, M., Karppinen, T. T., Snellman, E., & Rissanen, P. (2016). Photodynamic therapy for actinic keratoses: A randomized prospective non-sponsored cost-effectiveness study of daylightmediated treatment compared with light-emitting diode treatment. Acta Dermato-Venereologica, 96(2), 241–244. https://doi.org/10.2340/00015555-2205

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free