Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Cost effectiveness of linear accelerators.

M V Graham1

  • 1Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.

Rays
|December 22, 1999
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Staging of non-small cell lung carcinoma. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria.

Radiology·2000
Same author

Postoperative radiotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria.

Radiology·2000
Same author

Non-small cell lung cancer, nonsurgical, aggressive therapy. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria.

Radiology·2000
Same author

Neoadjuvant therapy for marginally resectable (clinical N2), non-small cell lung cancer. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria.

Radiology·2000
Same author

Non-aggressive, non-surgical treatment of inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria.

Radiology·2000
Same author

Follow-up of non-small cell lung cancer. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria.

Radiology·2000
Same journal

Esophageal cancer: 2nd multidisciplinary refresher course for residents, November 4-5, 2005, Rome, Italy.

Rays·2006
Same journal

Preoperative pulmonary risk assessment in esophagectomy.

Rays·2006
Same journal

Sems (self expanding metal stents) in palliation of esophageal cancer dysphagia.

Rays·2006
Same journal

Transhiatal esophagectomy (THE).

Rays·2006
Same journal

Histopathological classification of esophageal carcinomas.

Rays·2006
Same journal

Dysphagia following treatment for esophageal cancer: rehabilitation strategies.

Rays·2006
See all related articles

Cost-benefit analyses of radiation therapy, comparing Cobalt-60 (Co60) and linear accelerator (LINAC) treatments, are crucial. Cost benefits are realized when patient survival increases and morbidity decreases, not in palliative care settings.

Area of Science:

  • Oncology
  • Health Economics
  • Radiation Oncology

Background:

  • Radiation therapy is a significant healthcare expenditure.
  • Evaluating cost-effectiveness is essential for resource allocation in radiation oncology departments.
  • Comparing different radiation delivery technologies (Cobalt-60 vs. linear accelerators) is important for financial planning.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To conduct a cost analysis of radiation therapy.
  • To perform a cost-benefit analysis comparing Cobalt-60 (Co60) and linear accelerator (LINAC) therapy.
  • To determine the conditions under which radiation therapy provides the greatest cost benefit.

Main Methods:

  • Comparative cost analysis of Co60 and LINAC radiation therapy.
  • Cost-benefit evaluation based on patient outcomes (survival and morbidity).

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of cost-effectiveness in different patient populations (curative vs. palliative care).

    • Main Results:

    • Radiation therapy involves substantial costs.
    • Cost benefits are most evident when treatments lead to increased patient survival and reduced morbidity.
    • Cost benefits are unlikely to be achieved in treatment centers with a high volume of palliative care patients.

    Conclusions:

    • Cost-benefit analyses are valuable for radiation therapy departments.
    • The economic justification for radiation therapy hinges on improving clinical outcomes.
    • Resource allocation decisions should consider the specific patient population and treatment goals to maximize cost-effectiveness.