Estimated Costs Associated With Management of Otosclerosis With Hearing Aids vs Surgery in Europe.

Importance: Surgery and hearing aids have similar outcomes in terms of hearing acuity but differ in terms of cost, aesthetics, and patient quality of life. The cost-effectiveness and budget impact of otosclerosis treatments have never been studied in Europe. Objectives: To compare the estimated mean costs per patient over 10 years of surgery vs hearing aids for the treatment of otosclerosis and to estimate the budget impact of an increase in the proportion of patients receiving surgical treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation analyzed French and European epidemiological data on the surgical management of symptomatic otosclerosis and compared them with data from the literature to build economic models. The analysis was conducted in January 2021. Exposures: Two care pathways were considered in the treatment of otosclerosis, either hearing aid or surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: Costs were studied over 10 years using Markov models of the 2 care pathways (hearing aid vs surgery). The budget impact analysis was performed over 5 and 10 years, assuming a 1-percentage point yearly increase in the proportion of patients receiving surgical treatment. Results: Over 10 years, the estimated mean cost per patient was significantly lower in the surgery group compared with the hearing aid group (€3446.9 vs €6088.4; mean difference, -€2641.5; 95% CI -€4064.8 to -€1379.4 [US $3913.4 vs US $6912.4; mean difference, -US $2999.0; 95% CI, -US $4614.9 to -US $1566.1]). Increasing surgical treatment by 1 percentage point per year for 10 years would lead to overall savings of €1 762 304 (US $2 000 798) in France, with an increase of €1 322 920 (US $1 501 952) at 10 years for the public health insurance system and a decrease of €3 085 224 (US $3 502 750) at 10 years for patients and private health insurers. Sensitivity analyses showed that these results were robust. Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that in France, treating otosclerosis surgically is slightly less expensive over 10 years than using hearing aids, when considering all payers. The proposed models developed in this study could be adjusted to perform the same analysis in other countries.

An Assessment of the Clinical Acceptability of Direct Acoustic Cochlear Implantation for Adults With Advanced Otosclerosis in the United Kingdom.

HYPOTHESIS: Assess the clinical acceptability of direct acoustic cochlear implantation for patients with advanced otosclerosis and the support for conducting a controlled trial of its effectiveness in the United Kingdom. BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence supports the efficacy of direct acoustic cochlear implantation in patients with advanced otosclerosis whose needs cannot be managed using the combination of stapes surgery and hearing aids. A controlled trial would provide evidence for its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to healthcare commissioners. METHODS: An online survey of clinical professionals was constructed to characterize current standard of care for patients with advanced otosclerosis and to assess whether clinicians would be willing to refer patients into a trial to evaluate direct acoustic cochlear implantation. A consensus process was conducted to define inclusion criteria for the future trial. RESULTS: No survey respondent considered direct acoustic cochlear implantation to be inappropriate with a majority indicating that they would refer patients into a future trial. The consensus was that there is a lack of available treatment options for those patients with bone conduction thresholds worse than 55 dB HL and who did not meet current criteria for cochlear implantation. CONCLUSION: The present study confirms that a controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of direct acoustic cochlear implantation would have the support of clinicians in the United Kingdom. A feasibility study would be required to determine whether patients who meet the inclusion criteria could be recruited in a timely manner and in sufficient numbers to conduct a formal evaluation of effectiveness.

Economic viability of stapes surgery in Germany.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the economic viability of stapes surgery in Germany. We compared the cost of the operation to the retail value and average cost of a lifelong supply of hearing aids. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Tertiary referral centre. PATIENTS: One hundred and sixty-four consecutive cases of primary stapedotomy performed on patients with otosclerosis at our institution served as the representative group for the calculation. The post-operative air-bone gap average at the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz was less than 10 dB for 62 per cent of the patients, and less than 20 dB for 92 per cent of the patients. There was a post-operative sensorineural hearing loss in 1.2 per cent of the patients. RESULTS: Analysis showed that, even for an elderly patient aged 65 years with a life expectancy of 15 years, the cost of a lifelong supply of hearing aids was greater than that of a stapedotomy procedure. Based on our group of patients, the stapedotomy procedure proved to be euro 800,000 K cheaper than treatment with an averagely priced hearing aid. The economic benefit was still present when taking into account possible revision surgery in 5-10 per cent of cases, and also when, in addition to the surgery, a post-operative hearing aid was required, in for example 20 per cent of cases. CONCLUSION: Stapes surgery is economically beneficial for the individual patient as well as for the general patient cohort, irrespective of age. The stapedotomy procedure also prevents the known disadvantages of conventional hearing aids, thus improving the patient's quality of life.