Equivalence versus pragmatic trials for the economic evaluation of information and communication technologies; the case of polysomnography under telesurveillance in the diagnosis of sleep apnea syndrome.
This article deals with the choice of the appropriate protocols for the early economic evaluation of information and communication technologies, equivalence trial versus pragmatic trial. The reasoning put forward here is based on a concrete interrogation relative to polysomnography (PSG), a key diagnostic test for sleep apnoea syndrome (SAS). Is PSG under tele-surveillance more efficient than ambulatory PSG to diagnose SAS? After analyzing and discussing both advantages and limits of these two kinds of trial, we showed that one or the other can be used to obtain appropriate results. But in this particular example, we concluded that a pragmatic trial should be preferred, knowing that it requires a smaller sample of patients along with a narrower range of uncertainty concerning the evaluation of costs.
Pelletier-Fleury
N
N
INSERM U537, Centre de Recherche en Economie et Gestion appliquée A la Santé (G.R.E.G.A.S.), Hôpital de Bicêtre, 80 rue du Général Leclerc, 94276 Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France. fleury@kb.inserm.fr
Lanoé
J L
JL
D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D005602:France; D006801:Humans; D007385:Intermittent Positive-Pressure Ventilation; D018670:Monitoring, Ambulatory / Q000191:economics*; D017286:Polysomnography / Q000379:methods*; D012891:Sleep Apnea Syndromes / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000628:therapy; D013673:Technology Assessment, Biomedical / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*; D013686:Telemetry / Q000191:economics*