Full text is available at the source.
Health technology assessment (Winchester, England)··
Effectiveness and cost of using different brain monitoring methods to measure anesthesia depth
Updated
Abstract
The overall pooled odds ratio for reducing intraoperative awareness with Bispectral Index (BIS) monitoring was 0.45.
- BIS monitoring has a statistically significant association with reduced likelihood of intraoperative awareness compared to standard clinical monitoring.
- Cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for BIS monitoring ranges from £22,339 to £44,198 based on patient risk factors.
- E-Entropy monitoring estimates for cost per QALY range from £14,421 to £31,430.
- Narcotrend monitoring showed a cost per QALY ranging from £8,033 to a dominant position over standard monitoring.
- Limitations include insufficient clinical effectiveness data for E-Entropy and Narcotrend.
Simplified
BACKGROUND: It is important that the level of general anaesthesia (GA) is appropriate for the individual patient undergoing surgery. If anaesthesia is deeper than required to keep a patient unconscious, there might be increased risk of anaesthetic-related morbidity, such as postoperative nausea, vomiting and cognitive dysfunction. This may also prolong recovery times, potentially increasing health-care costs. If anaesthesia is too light, patients may not be fully unconscious and could be at risk of intraoperative awareness.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this report is to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Bispectral Index (BIS), E-Entropy and Narcotrend technologies, each compared with standard clinical monitoring, to monitor the depth of anaesthesia in surgical patients undergoing GA.
DATA SOURCES: A search strategy was developed and run on a number of bibliographic electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database. For the systematic review of patient outcomes, databases were searched from the beginning of 2009 to November 2011 for studies of BIS (and then updated in February 2012), and from 1995 to November 2011 (and then updated in February 2012) for studies of E-Entropy and Narcotrend. For the systematic review of cost-effectiveness, searches were from database inception to November 2011 (an update search was performed in February 2012).
REVIEW METHODS: The systematic review of patient outcomes followed standard methodology for evidence synthesis. A decision-analytic model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of depth of anaesthesia monitoring compared with standard clinical observation. A simple decision tree was developed, which accounted for patients' risk of experiencing short-term anaesthetic-related complications in addition to risk of experiencing intraoperative awareness.
RESULTS: Twenty-two randomised controlled trials comparing BIS, E-Entropy and Narcotrend with standard clinical monitoring were included in the systematic review of patient outcomes, alongside evidence from a recent Cochrane review. Six trials of patients classified with risk factors for intraoperative awareness were combined in a fixed-effect meta-analysis. The overall pooled Peto's odds ratio was 0.45 (95% confidence interval 0.25 to 0.81) in favour of BIS. However, there was statistically significant heterogeneity. The base-case cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for BIS compared with standard clinical monitoring ranged from £22,339 to £44,198 depending on patient subgroups (type of GA received; level of risk for awareness). For E-Entropy, base-case estimates ranged from £14,421 to £31,430. For Narcotrend, estimates varied from a cost per QALY of £8033 to Narcotrend dominating standard clinical monitoring.
LIMITATIONS: The analysis was limited by lack of clinical effectiveness data, particularly for E-Entropy and Narcotrend.
CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence on the impact of the technologies on reducing the likelihood of intraoperative awareness is limited. However, there were reductions in general anaesthetic consumption and anaesthetic recovery times. The cost-effectiveness of depth of anaesthesia monitoring appears to be highly dependent on a number of factors, including probability of awareness.
STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number CRD42011001834.
FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Related papers
Mar '16
Using brain signal complexity to monitor adults and children during general anesthesia
cited by 19 papers
systematic review
Nov '16
Using anesthesia to prevent patients from becoming aware during surgery
cited by 28 papers
systematic review
Sep '19
Using Bispectral Index to Reduce Awareness During Surgery and Speed Up Recovery in Adults
cited by 77 papers
systematic review
May '18
Using brain monitoring methods to reduce confusion and thinking problems after non-heart, non-brain surgery in adults
cited by 64 papers
systematic review
Jun '14
Using bispectral index to improve anesthesia and recovery after surgery
cited by 113 papers
systematic review
Nov '22
Folic acid supplements and malaria risk and severity in people using antifolate malaria drugs in affected areas
cited by 29 papers
systematic review
Sep '14
Cost-effectiveness of heart MRI compared to current tests for blocked heart muscle
cited by 21 papers
systematic review
Feb '02
The Narcotrend EEG monitor for measuring anesthesia depth compared to bispectral index during propofol-remifentanil anesthesia
cited by 82 papers
comparative study
Oct '12
Review of the Scientific Evidence on the Bispectral Index Monitor
top 50% journal
cited by 27 papers
journal article
Jan '18
Using multi-frequency bioimpedance devices to manage fluid in dialysis patients with chronic kidney disease: a review and cost analysis
cited by 43 papers
systematic review