chrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE), Cochrane Controlled Trial Register, HealthSTAR, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (AMED), relevant audit databases, and the Worldwide Web demonstrated no published articles on the cost utility of CAOS. These searches were performed in a structured fashion utilizing electronic databases and relevant audit databases between 1998 and 2006, using free text terms to identify papers that evaluated the cost utility or cost effectiveness of CAOS. A few papers casually mentioned the costs of these technologies in their methodology. Hip and knee arthroplasty has clearly been shown to be cost effective by a number of authors in several countries. The most commonly utilized technique to measure cost effectiveness is the cost utility ratio. This ratio involves the calculation of the impact of a specific intervention on the patient quality of life as well as the costs of that technology intervention. This ratio is then utilized to calculate what the costs per quality year for that particular intervention. Any new or additional expense that the surgeon or industry brings forward must be added on. The total cost must be factored in a calculation of further increases in quality adjusted well years. CAOS faces a significant hurdle as the current cost effectiveness of total hip and total knee arthroplasty is impressive without this new technology. © 2007 Springer Medizin Verlag Heidelberg.
CITATION STYLE
Stiehl, J. B., Bach, J., & Heck, D. A. (2007). Validation and metrology in CAOS. In Navigation and MIS in Orthopaedic Surgery (pp. 68–78). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-36691-1_9
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.