| Title |
The Memokath-051 Stent for the Treatment of Ureteric Obstruction: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40258-018-0389-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Emily Eaton Turner, Michelle Jenks, Rachael McCool, Chris Marshall, Liesl Millar, Hannah Wood, Alison Peel, Joyce Craig, Andrew J Sims |
| Abstract |
Memokath-051 is a thermo-expandable, nickel-titanium alloy spiral stent used to treat ureteric obstruction resulting from malignant or benign strictures. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) selected Memokath-051 for evaluation. The company, PNN Medical, claimed Memokath-051 has clinical superiority and cost savings compared with double-J stents. It identified five studies reporting clinical evidence on Memokath-051 and constructed a de novo cost model comparing Memokath-051 to double-J stents. Results indicated that Memokath-051 generated cost savings of £4156 per patient over 2.5 years. The External Assessment Centre (EAC) critiqued the company's submission and completed substantial additional work. Sixteen studies were identified assessing Memokath-051 and all listed comparators in the scope (double-J stents, reconstructive surgery and metallic and alloy stents) except nephrostomy. Similar success rates were reported for Memokath-051 compared with double-J and Resonance stents and worse outcomes compared with other options with evidence available. The EAC updated the company's cost model structure and modified several inputs. The EAC's model estimated that Memokath-051 generated savings of at least £1619 per patient over 5 years compared with double-J stents, was cost neutral compared with other metallic stents and was cost saving compared with surgery up to month 55. Overall, Memokath-051 is likely to be cost saving in patients not indicated for reconstructive surgery and those expected to require a ureteral stent for at least 30 months. The Medical Technologies Advisory Committee (MTAC) reviewed the evidence and supported the case for adoption, issuing partially supportive recommendations published after public consultation as Medical Technologies Guidance 35. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 16 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 26% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 15 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 April 2018.
All research outputs
#6,872,724
of 23,031,582 outputs
Outputs from Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
#302
of 784 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,475
of 329,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
#10
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,031,582 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 784 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,103 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.