DeWitt-Foy Molly E, Gill Bradley C, Ulchaker James C
Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Mail Stop Q10-1 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA.
Lerner College of Medicine, Education Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Mail Stop NA21 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA.
Curr Urol Rep. 2019 Jun 19;20(8):45. doi: 10.1007/s11934-019-0907-3.
To provide an economic context within which to consider treatment options for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). To this end, this review provides a comparison of the costs of combination medical therapy, operative treatment, and office-based therapies for BPH from a payer perspective.
Analysis of Medicare charges from the authors' institution, as well as local retail costs of medication, demonstrated a wide range in costs of commonly used BPH treatments. In this study, interventions for BPH reached cost equivalence with combination medical therapy within 6 months to 8 years. A myriad of options for managing men with symptomatic BPH exist. It is prudent not only to consider surgeon preference and patient-specific factors when selecting a treatment but also to understand the economic impact different BPH therapies confer.
提供一个经济背景，以便在此背景下考虑良性前列腺增生（BPH）的治疗的治疗方案。为此，本综述从支付方的角度比较了BPH联合药物治疗、手术治疗和门诊治疗的成本。
对作者所在机构的医疗保险费用以及当地药物零售成本进行分析后发现，常用BPH治疗方法的成本差异很大。在本研究中，BPH干预措施在6个月至8年内达到了与联合药物治疗相当的成本。对于有症状的BPH男性患者，存在多种管理方案。在选择治疗方法时，不仅要考虑外科医生的偏好和患者的具体因素，还要了解不同BPH治疗方法所带来的经济影响，这是明智之举。
