OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of using baseline neuromonitoring (BNM) compared with multimodality monitoring (M3) for severe @entity131 ( @entity131 ). METHODS: Sixty-two @entity1 with severe @entity131 underwent a prospective observational study where they were divided into two groups of @entity1 receiving treatment with M3 (32 @entity1 ) and BNM (30 @entity1 ). The macro and micro costings were performed on each @entity1 . The Barthel Index score after 1 year was used as an outcome measurement tool for both groups. The cost-effectiveness (CE) ratio was calculated using the Poisson regression model. RESULTS: The costs of equipment and consumables between the groups was statistically significant (p < 0.001) after correcting for age and severity of injury. Other cost categories were not significantly different. The crude CE ratios were 168.66 (95% CI: 168.32, 169.03) and 144.16 (95% CI: 143.87, 144.45) for BNM and M3 respectively. The two crude CE ratios were significantly different (p < 0.001). It was calculated by controlling or adjusting age, gender, Glasgow @entity772 Score, Marshalls classification at admission and @entity130 . The adjusted CE ratios were 171.32 (95% CI: 170.97, 171.68) and 141.50 (95% CI: 141.26, 141.79) for BNM and M3, respectively. The two adjusted CE ratios were significantly different ( p< 0.001). CONCLUSION: The application of M3 for severe @entity131 was more cost-effective than BNM. All calculations were made at 3.8 Malaysian Ringgit (MYR) to the United States dollar (USD).

Cost effectiveness analysis of using multiple neuromodalities in treating severe XXXX in a developing country like Malaysia.

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients', 'patient'] @entity131 :: ('MESH:D001930', 'Disease') :: ['TBI', 'traumatic brain injury'] @entity130 :: ('MESH:D014947', 'Disease') :: ['type of injury'] @entity772 :: ('MESH:D003128', 'Disease') :: ['Coma']
@entity131 :: (MESH:D001930,Disease) :: ['traumatic brain injury']
