Cost-effectiveness analysis of the surgical treatment of female urinary incontinence using slings and meshes

ObjectiveTo determine the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of the surgical treatment of female urinary incontinence using suburethral slings and prolapse meshes compared with therapeutic abstention.Study designAn economic analysis was performed on 69 women receiving surgical treatment for urinary incontinence using suburethral slings and prolapse meshes. To calculate the procedure's cost-effectiveness, an incremental analysis up to one year was performed using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The costs were calculated using a cost-by-process model. Answers to the health-related quality of life questionnaires EQ-5D (generic) and International Consultation Incontinence Questionnaire Short-form (specific) were collected before the operation and as well as one month and one year post-operation to calculate the utility, using quality-adjusted life years (QALY), and the effectiveness, respectively. To complete the economic evaluation, we derived confidence ellipses and acceptability curves. The analysis was conducted for the entire sample and also for each type of urinary incontinence.ResultsIn total, 45 women presented with stress incontinence, 15 with mixed incontinence and 9 with incontinence associated with prolapse. The average cost per patient at one year post-operation was 1220 €. The QALY achieved at one year was 0.046. The results reveal an ICER at one year of 26,288 €/QALY, which is below the cost-effectiveness threshold considered acceptable, and this value was lower for stress incontinence (21,191 €/QALY). The cost-effectiveness was 106.5 €/International Consultation Incontinence Questionnaire Short-form unit.ConclusionSurgery for female urinary incontinence using slings is cost-effective compared with abstention in our public health environment.