G-6 USING A MODEL-BASED ECONOMIC EVALUATION IN A FEASIBILITY STUDY TO INFORM THE VALUE OF A FUTURE TRIAL: A CASE STUDY OF GROMMETS-INSERTION FOR CHILDREN WITH CLEFT PALATE AFFECTED BY OTITIS MEDIA WITH EFFUSION

Tuesday, October 22, 2013: 11:30 AM
Key Ballroom 5-6 (Hilton Baltimore)
Applied Health Economics (AHE)

Syed Mohiuddin1, Katherine Payne1, Iain Bruce2, Peter Callery1, Nicola Harman1, Bill Shaw1, Tri Tat1, Stephanie Tierney1, Paula Williamson3 and Kevin O'Brien1, (1)University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom, (2)Central Manchester University Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom, (3)University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Purpose: There is a paucity of evidence to guide the treatment of Otitis Media with Effusion (OME), which is a common problem causing hearing impairment in children with Cleft Palate (CP). The surgical insertion of grommets is being used as a means of correcting hearing impairment and preventing complications of untreated OME, but there remains active discussion in the medical community about whether the benefits of grommets outweigh the risks. This study aimed to use value of information analysis within a mixed-methods feasibility study to inform future research requirements and priorities for the treatment of children with CP and OME.

   Method: A model-based early economic analysis compared the surgical insertion of grommets with two non-surgical alternatives (hearing-aids; do-nothing) in the management of persistent bilateral OME in children with CP. The model assumed a 2-year time horizon and UK NHS perspective. Outcomes were valued using Quality-Adjusted Life-Years (QALYs) estimated by linking published utility values with hearing gain (measured in decibels). Multiple data sources were used including: systematic reviews of the effectiveness, resource use and utility literature and supplemented with published expert opinion. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to quantify parameter uncertainty. The results of an expected value of perfect information analysis was combined with the findings from the qualitative views of children and parents about willingness to take part in a potential trial and important outcomes of OME management.

   Result: The probabilistic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for grommets insertion versus hearing-aids was £14,333 per QALY (95% CI: £8,311 to £20,355) and versus do-nothing was £18,036 per QALY (-£3,790 to £39,862). A key source of uncertainty was the assumed link with changes in utility values and hearing gain. The expected value of perfect information analysis indicated that the value of future research work in this area is worthwhile. Children and parents had clear ideas about outcomes that were important to them, which extended beyond hearing gain. However, more than half of the parents (63%) were negative or unsure about their child taking part in a future trial.

 

   Conclusion: This study has shown that value of information analysis has an important role in informing the need for future research but should be part of a wider programme of work to understand the feasibility and design of future trials.