Economic and clinical benefits of radiofrequency ablation versus hysterectomy in patients suffering from menorrhagia: a retrospective analysis with German health claims data
article
OA: closed
CC0
⤵ 1 in-corpus citation
AI-generated summary
This retrospective analysis of German health claims data found that radiofrequency ablation for menorrhagia generates initial cost savings compared to hysterectomy, with similar total costs over two years due to infrequent repeat interventions.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess clinical and economic benefits of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) compared to hysterectomy when treating patients suffering from menorrhagia. METHODS: Based on German health claims data, a retrospective, longitudinal, observational analysis was performed. Patients having continuously statutory health insurance coverage during the study and being coded for menorrhagia and a relevant treatment option were included in the analysis. The control group was created using propensity score matching. RESULTS: We discovered that using RFA generates cost savings of €1844 during the quarter of performance. As direct costs during a 2-year follow-up show similar levels in both groups, these initial savings can be preserved. This is partly because even if more patients in the RFA group were re-coded for menorrhagia after initial therapy, just a small proportion of these patients required another surgical intervention. CONCLUSION: RFA should more often be considered a relevant treatment option both from an economic and a medical point of view.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Citation neighborhood (sparse)
Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.
Cited by (1)
References (18)
- doi:10.2147/ijwh.s56364 via openalex
- doi:10.1080/00016340701415400 via openalex
- W141503944 via openalex
- doi:10.2147/ijwh.s30222 via openalex
- doi:10.3310/hta15190 via openalex
- doi:10.1080/00016340601089701 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2010.03.013 via openalex
- doi:10.4293/108680813x13693422520602 via openalex
- doi:10.1093/biomet/70.1.41 via openalex
- doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00602.x via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.12.025 via openalex
- doi:10.1136/bmj.e2564 via openalex
- doi:10.1162/003465302317331982 via openalex
- doi:10.1111/1471-0528.12319 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(99)00519-0 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s1701-2163(15)30789-1 via openalex
- doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000329.pub3 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s1074-3804(05)60082-5 via openalex
Cited by (1)
Source provenance
- openalex
- last seen: 2026-05-11T07:08:39.058960+00:00
License: CC0
· commercial use OK